Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 67
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 21(2): 125-132.e3, 2023 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36791763

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (CIPN) is a common complication of cancer treatment that produces functional disability. Increasingly, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess CIPN, providing a broader symptom perspective than clinician-graded scales. Understanding when a reported change in CIPN symptoms meets the threshold for clinical significance is challenging. This study aimed to provide interpretation guidelines for validated CIPN PROMs, and thereby enable estimation of thresholds to identify clinically relevant symptoms. METHODS: Patients commencing neurotoxic cancer treatments were assessed at 3 timepoints: baseline, midtreatment, and end-of-treatment. Trajectory of CIPN development was assessed by means of CIPN PROMs, EORTC Quality of Life - Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy questionnaire (QLQ-CIPN20), and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group - Neurotoxicity questionnaire (FACT/GOG-NTX). Thresholds were estimated for CIPN PROMs using the NCI CTCAE sensory neuropathy scale as the clinical anchor by midtreatment and end-of-treatment. Patients were assigned to a clinical change group according to CIPN development: either no development; grade 1 neuropathy (minimally important difference [MID]); or grade 2 neuropathy (clinically important difference). Distribution-based estimates (SD, 0.5) were also evaluated as supportive evidence. RESULTS: In total, 406 patients were recruited to the study, of whom 62% (n=199/320) developed CIPN by midtreatment and 80% (n=274/343) by end-of-treatment. Anchor-based MID estimates by midtreatment were 5.06 (95% CI, 4.26-5.86) for the QLQ-CIPN20 and 3.54 (95% CI, 2.87-4.20) for the FACT/GOG-NTX. End-of-treatment MIDs were estimated to be 7.32 (95% CI, 6.23-8.40) for the QLQ-CIPN20 and 4.84 (95% CI, 3.98-5.70) for the FACT/GOG-NTX. Distribution-based MID estimations yielded lower values than anchor-based methods, at 3.73 for the QLQ-CIPN20 and 2.64 for the FACT/GOG-NTX at midtreatment and 5.52 for the QLQ-CIPN20 and 3.64 for the FACT/GOG-NTX at end-of-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from the present series aid meaningful interpretation for commonly used validated CIPN PROMs and provide thresholds that serve as guidance on how to interpret score changes, which will be useful for design and evaluation of clinical trials and clinical practice.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Neoplasms , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases , Humans , Female , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Quality of Life , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/chemically induced , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/diagnosis , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/therapy , Surveys and Questionnaires , Patient Reported Outcome Measures
2.
Support Care Cancer ; 31(5): 255, 2023 Apr 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37041401

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors experience treatment-effects such as symptoms and functional impairments. There is limited evidence about how these are managed and what services or supports are available in the community. We aimed to identify current practice and available supports for managing consequences of treatment from clinician and CRC survivor perspectives. METHODS: This qualitative study, informed by an interpretivist constructionist paradigm, included semi-structured interviews. Clinicians with experience of treating CRC patients and adult CRC survivors were recruited across Australia. Interviews explored experiences about problems experienced after CRC treatment and how these were managed. Data collection and analysis, using thematic analysis, was iterative whereby emergent themes during analysis were incorporated into subsequent interviews. RESULTS: We interviewed 16 clinicians and 18 survivors. Survivors experienced a range of consequences of treatment amendable to support including allied health, information, and self-management. Barriers to support access included clinicians' worry about patient out-of-pocket expenses, long waitlists, lack of awareness about existing supports, and perception no therapeutic options were available. Healthcare professionals with expertise in CRC were often difficult to identify outside of cancer settings. Survivorship care could be improved with individualised timely information and identification of pathways to access healthcare providers with expertise in managing consequences of CRC treatment within primary care. CONCLUSIONS: To improve CRC survivor lives posttreatment, routine assessment of consequences of treatment, individualised care planning involving relevant healthcare professionals, access to supportive care when needed, and improved information provision and engagement of a range of health professionals in follow-up care are needed.


Subject(s)
Cancer Survivors , Colorectal Neoplasms , Adult , Humans , Qualitative Research , Survivors , Survivorship , Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy
3.
Qual Life Res ; 31(6): 1597-1620, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34580822

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in clinical settings to inform individual patient care. In-depth understanding of end-users' experiences may help identify factors that promote or hinder their use in clinical decision-making. We aimed to examine stakeholder perceptions of the utility of using PROMs in clinical practice based on real-life experience. METHODS: Systematic review searching Medline, Embase and PsychINFO from inception to May 2021. Qualitative studies examining patients' and/or clinicians' experiences of using PROMs in clinical settings were included. Study screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Qualitative data from included studies was analysed thematically. RESULTS: Of 2388 abstracts retrieved, 52 articles reporting 50 studies met eligibility. Five key benefits were identified: (1) promotes active patient involvement (enables goal setting and discussion of sensitive topics); (2) enhances the focus of consultations (prioritizes patient needs); (3) improves quality of care (enables tailored, holistic care and prompts action); (4) enables standardized monitoring of patient outcomes; and (5) enhances the patient-clinician relationship (provides reassurance). Perceived limitations included the capacity of PROMs to shift the focus of consultations; inaccurately estimate problems; raise unrealistic expectations for care; inhibit patient-clinician interaction; lack clinically meaningful information; and not be suitable for all patients. CONCLUSION: Both patients and clinicians reported benefits of using PROMs across diverse health conditions and clinical settings, but also highlighted several limitations. These limitations shed some light on why PROM use may not always improve patient outcomes and provide considerations for the design and implementation of future PROM initiatives.


Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Humans , Qualitative Research , Quality of Life/psychology
4.
Qual Life Res ; 31(11): 3091-3107, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35596913

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common toxicity of cancer treatment, with potential to significantly impact cancer survivors' long-term quality of life. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly utilised to evaluate CIPN. However, guidance remains lacking on how to identify fit for purpose PROMs with considerations necessarily differing when used in various research and in-clinic contexts. This study aimed to evaluate evidence about CIPN PROMs measurement properties and propose considerations to optimize CIPN PROM selection for each purpose. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to identify literature assessing measurement properties of CIPN PROMs. These were evaluated against Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) criteria and International Society for Quality of Life minimum standards. Risk of Bias (RoB) was assessed using the COSMIN RoB checklist. RESULTS: Thirty-nine papers evaluating measurement properties of 13 PROMs were included. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Questionnaire (QLQ-CIPN20) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx) were the most commonly investigated PROMs and had the most measurement properties meeting established criteria. CONCLUSION: The use of the QLQ-CIPN20 and FACT/GOG-Ntx to assess CIPN in research settings has the most supporting evidence. However other considerations including study aims, endpoints and target population also factor into PROM selection and need to be considered more often when determining the most suitable outcome measure. Evidence of CIPN PROMs use in clinical practice is limited and their adoption to individual-patient level management requires more evaluation.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/chemically induced , Psychometrics , Quality of Life/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
Qual Life Res ; 31(10): 2901-2916, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35553325

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Failure to incorporate key patient-reported outcome (PRO) content in trial protocols affects the quality and interpretability of the collected data, contributing to research waste. Our group developed evidence-based training specifically addressing PRO components of protocols. We aimed to assess whether 2-day educational workshops improved the PRO completeness of protocols against consensus-based minimum standards provided in the SPIRIT-PRO Extension in 2018. METHOD: Annual workshops were conducted 2011-2017. Participants were investigators/trialists from cancer clinical trials groups. Although developed before 2018, workshops covered 15/16 SPIRIT-PRO items. Participant feedback immediately post-workshop and, retrospectively, in November 2017 was summarised descriptively. Protocols were evaluated against SPIRIT-PRO by two independent raters for workshop protocols (developed post-workshop by participants) and control protocols (contemporaneous non-workshop protocols). SPIRIT-PRO items were assessed for completeness (0 = not addressed, 10 = fully addressed). Mann-Whitney U tests assessed whether workshop protocols scored higher than controls by item and overall. RESULTS: Participants (n = 107) evaluated the workshop positively. In 2017, 16/41 survey responders (39%) reported never applying in practice; barriers included role restrictions (14/41, 34%) and lack of time (5/41, 12%). SPIRIT-PRO overall scores did not differ between workshop (n = 13, median = 3.81/10, interquartile range = 3.24) and control protocols (n = 9, 3.51/10 (2.14)), (p = 0.35). Workshop protocols scored higher than controls on two items: 'specify PRO concepts/domains' (p = 0.05); 'methods for handling missing data' (p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Although participants were highly satisfied with these workshops, the completeness of PRO protocol content generally did not improve. Additional knowledge translation efforts are needed to assist protocol writers address SPIRIT-PRO guidance and avoid research waste that may eventuate from sub-optimal PRO protocol content.


Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Clinical Trial Protocols as Topic , Data Collection , Humans , Quality of Life/psychology , Research Design , Retrospective Studies
6.
Qual Life Res ; 31(2): 317-327, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34254262

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Proxy reports are often used when patients are unable to self-report. It is unclear how proxy measures are currently in use in adult health care and research settings. We aimed to describe how proxy reports are used in these settings, including the use of measures developed specifically for proxy reporting in adult health populations. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, PsycINFO, PsycTESTS, CINAHL and EMBASE from database inception to February 2018. Search terms included a combination of terms for quality of life and health outcomes, proxy-reporters, and health condition terms. The data extracted included clinical context, the name of the proxy measure(s) used and other descriptive data. We determined whether the measures were developed specifically for proxy use or were existing measures adapted for proxy use. RESULTS: The database search identified 17,677 possible articles, from which 14,098 abstracts were reviewed. Of these, 11,763 were excluded and 2335 articles were reviewed in full, with 880 included for data extraction. The most common clinical settings were dementia (30%), geriatrics (15%) and cancer (13%). A majority of articles (51%) were paired studies with proxy and patient responses for the same person on the same measure. Most paired studies (77%) were concordance studies comparing patient and proxy responses on these measures. DISCUSSION: Most published research using proxies has focused on proxy-patient concordance. Relatively few measures used in research with proxies were specifically developed for proxy use. Future work is needed to examine the performance of measures specifically developed for proxies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO No. CRD42018103179.


Subject(s)
Proxy , Quality of Life , Adult , Humans , Quality of Life/psychology
7.
Qual Life Res ; 30(9): 2649-2661, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33797687

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancers (HNC) and their treatments cause dysfunction and distress. Ongoing psychological assessment using disease-specific patient-reported measures may optimize clinical decision-making, facilitate interventions to reduce psychosocial burden. As most such measures are developed in English, non-English speaking patients are disadvantaged. This study translated HNC-specific measures (Body Image Scale, Patient Concerns Inventory, Zung's Self-Rating Anxiety and Depression Scales and Patient Health Questionnaire-9) into three Indian languages (Hindi, Tamil and Telugu) and linguistically validated them. METHODS: Translation followed established guidelines on translation and linguistic validation of measures. Process involved two independent forward translations, reconciliation, two independent backward translations by bilingual experts, and cognitive debriefing interviews with nine healthcare professionals (HCPs) and 29 HNC patients. Translated versions were compared with the original versions for semantic, cultural and conceptual equivalence. RESULTS: Overall, 17 Hindi items, 19 Tamil items and 13 Telugu items were identified to have semantic, cultural and/or conceptual issues. These were resolved to achieve equivalence with the original measures. Interviews with HCPs indicated that equivalent terms for words such as anxiety, panicky, sexuality, and self-conscious might be difficult to understand. Interviews with patients indicated all items were understandable, easy, sensitive, unambiguous and relevant. Hence, no further revisions were made. CONCLUSIONS: The translated Hindi, Tamil and Telugu versions of the Body image scale, Patient concerns inventory, Zung's self-rating anxiety and depression scales and Patient health questionnaire-9 measures are conceptually and linguistically validated and equivalent with the original English versions. Psychometric validation of these measures with relevant patient populations is needed.


Subject(s)
Cross-Cultural Comparison , Head and Neck Neoplasms , Humans , India , Linguistics , Quality of Life/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Translations
8.
Qual Life Res ; 30(8): 2109-2121, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33792834

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To ensure clarity in communication in the field of quality of life research, and meaningful use of 'quality of life' as a research outcome, requires two things: awareness that there is a range of conceptualisations and definitions of 'quality of life', and for any particular study, consistency between the way the term is defined and operationalised in that setting. We aimed to identify how frequently research articles described (HR)QOL as a construct of interest, how frequently they referred to "patient-reported outcome (measures)", which patient-reported outcome measures were used, and how (HR)QOL was defined. METHODS: We reviewed all Quality of Life Research articles published in 2017 and recorded whether they described health-related quality of life or quality of life as constructs of interest, and/or mentioned the term(s) patient-reported outcome (measures). We recorded definitions of (HR)QOL stated and questionnaires used. We classified articles according to constructs assessed and instruments used, and examined whether articles citing the same definition used the same questionnaires. RESULTS: We reviewed 300 articles; 65% stated that (HR)QOL was a construct of interest, 27% mentioned patient-reported outcome (measures), and 20% mentioned neither. Fifty-one articles provided definitions of (HR)QOL, citing 66 sources, with 11 definitions cited more than once. PROMIS, SF, EQ-5D, and EORTC instruments were the most commonly used. The only definition and questionnaire consistently used together were the WHO definitions/instruments. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate considerable heterogeneity in the definition and operationalisation of (HR)QOL, between and within studies. This limits meaningful interpretation of (HR)QOL scores and complicates literature searches. Investigators should define constructs and select instruments aligned with their definitions.


Subject(s)
Health Status , Quality of Life , Humans , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Surveys and Questionnaires
9.
Qual Life Res ; 30(2): 345-366, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32960394

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a chronic condition requiring repeated treatment and endoscopic examinations that can occur life-long. In this context, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important considerations to patients and managing clinicians. We undertook a systematic review to synthesise PRO results relevant to NMIBC treatment to explore trajectories overtime and differences between treatment options. METHODS: We searched databases AMED, MEDLINE, EMbase, PsycINFO, Web of Knowledge and Scopus (inception to 5th December 2019), reference lists and contacted key authors to identify studies that reported PROs after NMIBC treatment. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion and quality criteria and extracted findings. Results for PROs were synthesised for treatment groups across three time periods: acute/during induction therapy; during maintenance therapy; and long-term follow-up (> 1 year). RESULTS: Of 3193 papers screened, 29 were eligible. These provided evidence about induction treatment effects, but few reported maintenance or long-term evidence, and evidence about differences between NMIBC treatment options was lacking. A range of symptoms (pain in bladder area, urinary frequency and urgency, pain or burning during urination) were commonly experienced during and soon after treatment for NMIBC. Less common symptoms included fatigue, disrupted sleep and gastrointestinal problems. CONCLUSIONS: Treatments for NMIBC can cause symptoms and functional impairment during the acute treatment phase and reduce quality of life. Clinicians should be aware of these impairments to prepare patients for short-term sequelae and enable those with treatment options to exercise preferences in choosing among them. However, gaps in current evidence limit our understanding of PRO trajectories from diagnosis through to long-term survivorship and treatment effects.


Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Quality of Life/psychology
10.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 11: CD013385, 2021 11 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34749427

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Decision coaching is non-directive support delivered by a healthcare provider to help patients prepare to actively participate in making a health decision. 'Healthcare providers' are considered to be all people who are engaged in actions whose primary intent is to protect and improve health (e.g. nurses, doctors, pharmacists, social workers, health support workers such as peer health workers). Little is known about the effectiveness of decision coaching. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of decision coaching (I) for people facing healthcare decisions for themselves or a family member (P) compared to (C) usual care or evidence-based intervention only, on outcomes (O) related to preparation for decision making, decisional needs and potential adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library (Wiley), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), Nursing and Allied Health Source (ProQuest), and Web of Science from database inception to June 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where the intervention was provided to adults or children preparing to make a treatment or screening healthcare decision for themselves or a family member. Decision coaching was defined as: a) delivered individually by a healthcare provider who is trained or using a protocol; and b) providing non-directive support and preparing an adult or child to participate in a healthcare decision. Comparisons included usual care or an alternate intervention. There were no language restrictions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened citations, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data on characteristics of the intervention(s) and outcomes. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion to reach consensus. We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the measures of treatment effect and, where possible, synthesised results using a random-effects model. If more than one study measured the same outcome using different tools, we used a random-effects model to calculate the standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI. We presented outcomes in summary of findings tables and applied GRADE methods to rate the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Out of 12,984 citations screened, we included 28 studies of decision coaching interventions alone or in combination with evidence-based information, involving 5509 adult participants (aged 18 to 85 years; 64% female, 52% white, 33% African-American/Black; 68% post-secondary education). The studies evaluated decision coaching used for a range of healthcare decisions (e.g. treatment decisions for cancer, menopause, mental illness, advancing kidney disease; screening decisions for cancer, genetic testing). Four of the 28 studies included three comparator arms.  For decision coaching compared with usual care (n = 4 studies), we are uncertain if decision coaching compared with usual care improves any outcomes (i.e. preparation for decision making, decision self-confidence, knowledge, decision regret, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low.  For decision coaching compared with evidence-based information only (n = 4 studies), there is low certainty-evidence that participants exposed to decision coaching may have little or no change in knowledge (SMD -0.23, 95% CI: -0.50 to 0.04; 3 studies, 406 participants). There is low certainty-evidence that participants exposed to decision coaching may have little or no change in anxiety, compared with evidence-based information. We are uncertain if decision coaching compared with evidence-based information improves other outcomes (i.e. decision self-confidence, feeling uninformed) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. For decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with usual care (n = 17 studies), there is low certainty-evidence that participants may have improved knowledge (SMD 9.3, 95% CI: 6.6 to 12.1; 5 studies, 1073 participants). We are uncertain if decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with usual care improves other outcomes (i.e. preparation for decision making, decision self-confidence, feeling uninformed, unclear values, feeling unsupported, decision regret, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. For decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with evidence-based information only (n = 7 studies), we are uncertain if decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with evidence-based information only improves any outcomes (i.e. feeling uninformed, unclear values, feeling unsupported, knowledge, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Decision coaching may improve participants' knowledge when used with evidence-based information. Our findings do not indicate any significant adverse effects (e.g. decision regret, anxiety) with the use of decision coaching. It is not possible to establish strong conclusions for other outcomes. It is unclear if decision coaching always needs to be paired with evidence-informed information. Further research is needed to establish the effectiveness of decision coaching for a broader range of outcomes.


Subject(s)
Mentoring , Adult , Anxiety , Child , Family , Female , Health Personnel/education , Humans , Male , Patient Participation
11.
Wound Repair Regen ; 28(3): 355-363, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31794080

ABSTRACT

Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) are a common chronic often undertreated condition, which affects individual's health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been validated to capture HRQoL in patients with VLUs. However, available instruments contain many items, are hard to use in clinical practice, and present with weak responsiveness. This study aims to determine clinical utility of an existing VLU-QoL instrument and to develop a comprehensive PROs assessment framework to guide clinical practice treatment in people with VLUs in Australia. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with VLU patients (N = 13) and their managing clinicians (N = 6) in Victoria, Australia. Interview topics covered content and face validity, appropriateness, and acceptability of the VLU-QoL instrument to determine suitable and appropriate for use in clinical practice. Clinicians and patients agreed that a VLU-QoL instrument was needed in clinical practice. Both clinicians and patients agreed it would be appropriate to answer PROMs questions prior to consultation with clinicians every 3-6 months. However, patients considered that some of the questions are ambiguous and too technical. Patients reported that it would be useful to include additional items relating to daily wound care, compression bandaging, and dressings. Clinicians reported that the VLU-QoL instrument was too long and required restructuring to facilitate utility in practice. A conceptual framework for HRQoL in VLUs included traditional HRQoL components and VLU-specific issues. Overall, the VLU-QoL was well accepted, although changes to make it more concise, comprehensive, and to clearly reflect consumers' perspectives were lacking. The proposed conceptual framework will inform the development of a new PROM for use by clinicians and patients in clinical settings.


Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Varicose Ulcer/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Attitude of Health Personnel , Australia , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Satisfaction , Symptom Assessment , Varicose Ulcer/complications , Varicose Ulcer/psychology
12.
J Behav Med ; 43(6): 873-891, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32060765

ABSTRACT

Previous reviews explored weight loss-induced metabolic changes in overweight and obese adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) but did not report on the impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This systematic review investigated the effect of weight loss interventions on weight loss and PROs in overweight and obese adults with T2D. We searched three electronic databases from inception to March 2018 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of weight loss interventions in overweight and obese (according to BMI) adults aged ≥ 18 years reporting changes in PROs from baseline to at least one follow-up assessment during or post-intervention. One reviewer screened abstracts, performed data extraction, and conducted the narrative synthesis, with 25% cross-checking by a second reviewer. We extracted data relating to sample characteristics, intervention and comparison conditions, weight loss, and change in PROs. We identified 540 papers of which 23 met eligibility reporting on 19 RCTs. Four types of interventions (diet, surgery, pharmacological, and multi-component lifestyle interventions) significantly reduced weight. Weight loss was consistently associated with improvements in sexual and physical function across all intervention types, with diet and multi-component lifestyle interventions producing more substantial improvements than surgical or pharmacological interventions. Findings for other PROs, such as HRQOL and depressive symptoms, were inconsistent across studies and intervention types. The four weight loss interventions can be prescribed to engender weight loss in overweight and obese adults with T2D, with multi-component lifestyle interventions generating substantial improvements in physical and sexual function, perhaps due to the potency of exercise in improving PROs.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Weight Loss , Adolescent , Adult , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Humans , Obesity/complications , Obesity/therapy , Overweight/therapy , Patient Reported Outcome Measures
13.
Am J Transplant ; 19(8): 2306-2317, 2019 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30664327

ABSTRACT

For many patients with end-stage kidney disease, transplantation improves survival and quality of life compared with dialysis. However, complications and side effects in kidney transplant recipients can limit their ability to participate in activities of daily living including work, study, and recreational activities. The aim of this study was to identify the characteristics, content, and psychometric properties of the outcome measures used to assess life participation in kidney transplant recipients. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from inception to July 2018 for all studies that reported life participation in kidney transplant recipients. Two authors identified instruments measuring life participation and reviewed for characteristics. In total, 230 studies were included: 19 (8%) randomized trials, 17 (7%) nonrandomized trials, and 194 (85%) observational studies. Across these studies, we identified 29 different measures that were used to assess life participation. Twelve (41%) measures specifically assessed aspects of life participation (eg, disability assessment, daily activities of living), while 17 (59%) assessed other constructs (eg, quality of life) that included questions on life participation. Validation data to support the use of these measures in kidney transplant recipients were available for only 7 measures. A wide range of measures have been used to assess life participation in kidney transplant recipients, but validation data supporting the use of these measures in this population are sparse. A content relevant and validated measure to improve the consistency and accuracy of measuring life participation in research may inform strategies for transplant recipients to be better able to engage in their life activities.


Subject(s)
Activities of Daily Living , Kidney Transplantation/rehabilitation , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Humans , Prognosis , Social Participation
14.
Psychooncology ; 28(12): 2295-2306, 2019 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31654540

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Morbidity from head and neck cancers (HNCs) and their treatment are significant, given their proximity to anatomical sites impacting facial appearance and function. Assessing the needs of HNC patients throughout their cancer journey is critical to informing quality care and improving quality of life. We aimed to identify available unmet needs measures in the HNC setting and appraise their content and psychometric properties. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases (July 2007-July 2019) to identify studies of unmet needs in patients with HNC. In addition, three web-based patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) databases were searched for unmet needs measures. Citations were screened for eligibility and identified measures reviewed for content coverage and psychometric properties. From identified measures and literature, a conceptual framework with 12 clinically relevant aspects of unmet needs was developed and used to assess the conceptual coverage of available unmet needs measures. RESULTS: Literature search identified 273 records of which 28 studies assessing unmet needs in HNC cancer met eligibility criteria. Seven unmet needs measures were identified from retrieved studies and seven additional measures from PROM databases. Thus, 14 measures in total were reviewed. Content mapping revealed that three measures demonstrated excellent content validity (greater than 80% conceptual coverage): Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI), Needs Assessment for Advanced Cancer Patients (NA-ACP), and James Supportive Care Screening (JSCS). CONCLUSION: We recommend PCI be used to measure unmet needs in the HNC setting considering the importance of content validity over quantitative psychometric properties.


Subject(s)
Head and Neck Neoplasms , Health Services Needs and Demand , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Patient Satisfaction , Psychometrics/standards , Humans
15.
Wound Repair Regen ; 27(4): 396-405, 2019 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30868673

ABSTRACT

Patient-reported outcomes can be included as end points in pressure ulcer (PU) intervention trials to provide information to inform decision-making and improve the lives of patients. However, the challenge for researchers and clinicians is identifying and choosing an appropriate instrument for each particular application that suits their research questions and clinical context. To provide researchers and clinicians with the information needed to inform choice of patient-reported outcome measures, we compared a generic and disease-specific measures' ability to discriminate between clinical groups known to differ, and determined their responsiveness to change. We performed analyses on a subset of patients recruited to the PRESSURE 2 trial that completed the pressure ulcer quality of life instrument-prevention version (PU-QOL-P) and Short Form 12 Questionnaire (SF12) measures at baseline and 30-day posttreatment. Known-group validity and responsiveness-to-change analyses were conducted. The analysis sample consisted of 617 patients that completed both measures at baseline. Known-group validity revealed that some PU-QOL-P symptoms and function scales differentiated between people with category 2 PUs and those without PUs. A less meaningful pattern of results was observed for the SF12 scales, suggesting that the PU-QOL-P is more sensitive to differences between PU and non-PU populations. Responsiveness analysis revealed that the PU-QOL-P was more responsive in detecting disease severity than the SF12. The PU-QOL-P provides a standardized method for assessing PU-specific symptoms and functioning outcomes and is suitable for quantifying the benefits of PU interventions from the patient's perspective. Generic measures are useful for group comparisons of global quality of life domains. Choice of measure for each particular application should be determined by the purpose of the measurement and the information required.


Subject(s)
Pressure Ulcer/prevention & control , Wound Healing/physiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Pressure Ulcer/classification , Reproducibility of Results , Skin Care , Surveys and Questionnaires
16.
Support Care Cancer ; 27(10): 3657-3666, 2019 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31203508

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Head and neck cancer (HNC) is a relatively common cancer which causes a significant health burden, impacting individuals physically and psychologically. HNC treatment may result in facial disfigurement, eating and communication difficulties, and body image disturbances. We aimed to (1) identify HNC-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess body image, (2) evaluate their conceptual coverage, (3) appraise their development process and psychometric properties, and (4) determine appropriate body image PROM(s) for use in the HNC setting. METHODS: Online databases were searched (July 2007-July 2017) for studies that assessed body image in patients with HNC. Studies were screened for eligibility. In addition, we searched three PROM databases for relevant PROMs. From available body image frameworks, we compiled a conceptual schema consisting of 18 clinically relevant body image issues important in the HNC setting, against which PROMs were assessed. Selected measures were appraised for psychometric characteristics, content, and readability. RESULTS: A total of 245 records were retrieved. 18 studies with PROMs met our inclusion criteria, reporting eight PROMs. The PROM databases searched yielded 62 measures. After screening, eleven measures were short-listed and appraised. The Derriford Appearance Scale (DAS)-59, DAS-24, and body image scale (BIS) cover > 55% of issues within the body image conceptual schema; were developed based on literature, patient interviews, and clinician opinions; and have evidence of internal consistency (Cronbach alpha > 0.7), validity, and responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the DAS-24 and BIS as having adequate coverage of HNC-related issues, and suitable for use in future research.


Subject(s)
Body Image/psychology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/psychology , Psychometrics/methods , Databases, Factual , Head and Neck Neoplasms/diagnosis , Humans , Patient Reported Outcome Measures
17.
Qual Life Res ; 28(11): 2871-2887, 2019 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31364037

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has been determined in some cancers, but a focussed review in colorectal cancer (CRC) has not yet been conducted. We systematically reviewed PRO predictors of CRC patient survival. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases (from inception to May 2018), reference lists and professional organisations to identify studies reporting pre-treatment PRO predictors of overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in CRC identified through univariate or multivariate models. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion criteria and extracted data on study characteristics, median and 1-year survival rates, PROs assessed and model results. RESULTS: In 25 of 27 studies (n = 12,544), at least one PRO was significantly associated with survival. Physical functioning, fatigue, pain and appetite loss predicted OS more often than other PROs in metastatic disease (19/27 studies). One study explored PRO predictors in early-stage CRC, finding emotional well-being and mood predicted OS. In mixed-stage samples (7/27 studies), physical functioning predicted OS more often than other PROs. Few studies modelled PFS, for which few PROs had predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: Physical and psychological functioning, pain, fatigue and appetite loss had prognostic significance above and beyond clinical predictors in CRC. Routine monitoring of these PROs may allow earlier detection and amelioration of problems, which may improve quality of life and perhaps extend survival. More research is needed to determine prognostic value of PROs in early-stage CRC, and prognostic significance of changes in PRO scores.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life/psychology , Colorectal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Prognosis
18.
Qual Life Res ; 28(3): 593-607, 2019 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30426276

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Patient decision-aids (PtDAs) help patients make informed treatment decisions incorporating their values. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is sometimes an outcome of PtDA effectiveness trials, but its suitability for this purpose is unclear. We sought to provide insights into this question by critically appraising how randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PtDA effectiveness measure and report HRQOL. METHODS: We conducted a sub-analysis of RCTs included in the 2017 Cochrane review of PtDAs. Trials assessing HRQOL at baseline and post-PtDA, and comparing PtDA with comparison groups were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: Of 105 RCTs, 11 were eligible for inclusion. Patients randomized to PtDAs did not report better HRQOL than those randomized to usual care. While all 11 RCTs adequately described baseline sample characteristics and reported HRQOL results for study groups, few stated a priori HRQOL expectations or hypotheses (36%); made a link between HRQOL and the decision (18%); provided a rationale or justification for HRQOL assessment (18%); provided reason for choice of HRQOL assessment time-points (9%); or adjusted p-values for multiple HRQOL domains and time-points (0%). DISCUSSION: PtDAs did not conclusively impact HRQOL. If this holds generally, then HRQOL is an uninformative endpoint for PtDA effectiveness trials. When planning trials of PtDAs, investigators considering HRQOL endpoints should consider whether and why their PtDA is likely to affect HRQOL in their context, and if so, which specific aspect(s) of HRQOL and at which time-point(s), and ensure HRQOL is assessed accordingly.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Decision Support Techniques , Health Status , Quality of Life , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Humans , Qualitative Research , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
19.
Qual Life Res ; 28(4): 955-962, 2019 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30554370

ABSTRACT

AIMS: A proxy is someone other than a patient who reports a patient's outcomes as if they are the patient. Due to known discordance with patient reports, proxies are often not recommended in clinical trials; however, proxies may be needed in certain research contexts. We aimed to identify and describe trials registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) with proxy-reported endpoints. METHODS: ANZCTR was systematically searched from inception (2005) to 31 March 2017 for trials with proxy-reported endpoints. Primary and secondary endpoints for each trial retrieved by the search were individually coded (proxy-reported: yes/no), and trials with confirmed proxy-reported endpoints were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of 13,666 registered trials, 469 (3.4%) included a proxy-reported endpoint (867 individual proxy-reported endpoints in total: 62% family member proxy, 22% health professional). Proxy endpoint inclusion did not significantly increase over time (r = 0.18, p = 0.59). Mental health (11.5%), stroke (10.3%) and neurological (8.3%) trials had the highest proportion of trials using proxies. Of the 469 trials, 123 (26.2%) studies involved paediatric patients. DISCUSSION: Proxy-reported endpoints are included in a small but notable number of studies, which may indicate other types of outcomes are used for patients unable to self-report, or that these patients are under-researched.


Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life/psychology , Australia , Female , Humans , Male , New Zealand , Proxy , Registries
20.
Am J Kidney Dis ; 72(1): 104-112, 2018 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29551585

ABSTRACT

Fatigue is one of the most highly prioritized outcomes for patients and clinicians, but remains infrequently and inconsistently reported across trials in hemodialysis. We convened an international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) consensus workshop with stakeholders to discuss the development and implementation of a core outcome measure for fatigue. 15 patients/caregivers and 42 health professionals (clinicians, researchers, policy makers, and industry representatives) from 9 countries participated in breakout discussions. Transcripts were analyzed thematically. 4 themes for a core outcome measure emerged. Drawing attention to a distinct and all-encompassing symptom was explicitly recognizing fatigue as a multifaceted symptom unique to hemodialysis. Emphasizing the pervasive impact of fatigue on life participation justified the focus on how fatigue severely impaired the patient's ability to do usual activities. Ensuring relevance and accuracy in measuring fatigue would facilitate shared decision making about treatment. Minimizing burden of administration meant avoiding the cognitive burden, additional time, and resources required to use the measure. A core outcome measure that is simple, is short, and includes a focus on the severity of the impact of fatigue on life participation may facilitate consistent and meaningful measurement of fatigue in all trials to inform decision making and care of patients receiving hemodialysis.


Subject(s)
Consensus , Education/methods , Fatigue/therapy , Nephrology/methods , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Renal Dialysis/methods , Fatigue/etiology , Humans , Renal Dialysis/adverse effects , Research Report , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL