A Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument to Assess Symptom Burden and Predict Survival in Patients with Advanced Cancer: Flipping the Paradigm to Improve Timing of Palliative and End-of-Life Discussions and Reduce Unwanted Health Care Costs.

BACKGROUND: Discussions regarding palliative care and end-of-life care issues are frequently delayed past the time of usefulness, resulting in unwanted medical care. We sought to develop a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument that allows patients to voice their symptom burdens and facilitate timing of discussions. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: A seven-item PRO instrument (Cota Patient Assessed Symptom Score-7 item [CPASS-7]) covering physical performance status, pain, burden, and depression was administered (September 2015 through October 2016) with correlation to overall survival, correcting for time to complete survey since diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 1,191 patients completed CPASS-7 at a median of 560 days following the diagnosis of advanced cancer. Of these patients, 49% were concerned that they could not do the things they wanted; 35% reported decreased performance status. Financial toxicity was reported by 39% of patients, with family burdens noted in 25%. Although depression was reported by 15%, 43% reported lack of pleasure. Pain was reported by 33%. The median CPASS-7 total symptom burden score was 16 (possible 0-112). With a median follow-up of 15 months from initial survey, 46% had died. Patients with symptom burden scores <29 and ≥29 had a 6-month overall survival rate of 87% and 67%, respectively, and 12-month survival rates of 72% and 50%. A one-point score increase resulted in a 1.8% increase in expected hazard. CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced cancer with higher levels of symptom burden, as self-reported on the CPASS-7, had inferior survival. The PRO facilitates identification of patients appropriate for reassessment of treatment goals and potentially palliative and end-of-life care in response to symptom burden concerns. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A seven-item patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument was administered to 1,191 patients with advanced cancers. Patients self-reporting higher levels of physical and psychological symptom burden had inferior overall survival rates. High individual item symptom PRO responses should serve as a useful trigger to initiate supportive interventions, but when scores indicate global problems, discussions regarding end-of-life care might be appropriate.

Mortality, Hospital Costs, Payments, and Readmissions Associated With Clostridium difficile Infection Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: The management of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) among hospitalized patients is costly, and ongoing payment reform is compelling hospitals to reduce its burden. To assess the impact of CDI on mortality, hospital costs, healthcare use, and Medicare payments for beneficiaries who were discharged with CDI listed as a secondary International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification claim diagnosis. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the 2009 to 2010 5% random sample Medicare Standard Analytic Files of beneficiary claims. Patients with index hospitalizations with CDI as a secondary diagnosis and no previous hospitalization within 30 days were identified. Outcomes included inpatient and 30-day mortality, inpatient costs, index hospital payments, all-provider payments, net hospital losses, payment to cost ratio, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day readmission; outcomes were each risk adjusted using propensity score matching and regression modeling techniques. RESULTS: A total of 3262 patients with CDI were identified after matching to patients without a CDI diagnosis. After risk adjustment, secondary CDI was associated with statistically significantly (all P < 0.05) greater inpatient mortality (3.1% vs. 1.7%), 30-day mortality (4.1% vs. 2.2%), longer LOS (7.0 days vs. 3.8 days), higher rates of 30-day hospital readmissions (14.8% vs. 10.4%), and greater hospital costs ($16,184 vs. $13,954) compared with the non-CDI cohort. The risk-adjusted payment-to-cost ratio was shown to be lower for patients with CDI than those without (0.76 vs. 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: Secondary CDI is associated with greater adjusted mortality, costs, LOS, and hospital readmissions, while receiving similar hospital reimbursement compared with patients without CDI in a Medicare population.

Exploring the implementation of patient-reported outcome measures in cancer care: need for more real-world evidence results in the peer reviewed literature.

BACKGROUND: To explore the existing evidence of the real-world implementation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in oncology clinical practice and address two aims: (1) summarize available evidence of PRO use in clinical practice using a framework based on the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) PRO Implementation Guide; and (2) describe reports of real-world, standardized PRO administration in oncology conducted outside of scope of a research study. METHODS: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol was developed to guide the systematic literature review (SLR) that was conducted in MEDLINE and Embase databases. A two step search strategy was implemented including two searches based on previously completed reviews. Studies published from 2006 to 2017 were synthesized using a framework based on the ISOQOL PRO Implementation Guide. RESULTS: After screening 4427 abstracts, 36 studies met the eligibility criteria. Most elements of the ISOQOL PRO Implementation Guide were followed. Two notable exceptions were found: 1) providing PRO score interpretation guidelines (39% of studies); and 2) providing patient-management guidance for addressing issues identified by PROs (25% of studies). Of the 22 studies with an intervention component, 19 (86%) reported intervention effects on study outcomes. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) was the most commonly used PRO (n = 10, 28%); use of 38 other PRO measures was also reported. Only three studies (8%) reported real-world PRO implementation. CONCLUSION: Reports of real-world PRO implementation are limited. Reports from studies conducted in clinical settings suggest gaps in information on PRO score interpretation and the use of PRO results to inform patient management. Before the promise of practice-based PRO assessment in oncology can be truly realized, investigators need to advance the state-of-the-art of real-time PRO score interpretation as well as developing guidance on how to use PRO insights to drive clinically-meaningful patient-management strategies.