Patient prioritisation of items to develop the Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases measure: A global Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: The Global Research on the Impact of Dermatological Diseases (GRIDD) project is developing the new Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure. PRIDD measures the impact of dermatological conditions on the patient's life. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to seek consensus from patients on which items to prioritize for inclusion in PRIDD. METHODS: A modified, two-round Delphi study was conducted. Adults (≥18 years) with dermatological conditions were recruited. The survey consisted of a demographic's questionnaire and 263 potential impact items in six languages. Quantitative data used Likert-type ranking scales and analysed against consensus criteria. Qualitative data collected free text responses for additional feedback and a framework analysis was conducted. RESULTS: 1154 people representing 90 dermatological conditions from 66 countries participated. Items were either removed (n = 79), edited (n = 179) or added (n = 2), based on consensus thresholds and qualitative feedback. Results generated the first draft of PRIDD with 27 items across five impact domains. CONCLUSION: This Delphi study resulted in the draft version of PRIDD, ready for psychometric testing. The triangulated data helped refine the existing conceptual framework of impact. PRIDD has since been pilot tested with patients and is currently undergoing psychometric testing.

Evidence of the content validity, acceptability, and feasibility of a new Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases measure.

Background: The Global Research on the Impact of Dermatological Diseases (GRIDD) team is developing the new Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure of the impact of dermatological conditions on the patient's life, in partnership with patients. To develop PRIDD, we conducted a systematic review, followed by a qualitative interview study with 68 patients worldwide and subsequently a global Delphi survey of 1,154 patients to ensure PRIDD items were meaningful and important to patients. Objective: To pilot test PRIDD with patients with dermatological conditions, focusing on its content validity (comprehensiveness, comprehensibility, and relevance), acceptability, and feasibility. Methods: We conducted a theory-led qualitative study using the Three-Step Test-Interview method of cognitive interviewing. Three rounds of semi-structured interviews were conducted online. Adults (≥ 18 years) living with a dermatological condition and who spoke English sufficiently to take part in the interview were recruited through the International Alliance of Dermatology Patient Organizations' (GlobalSkin) global membership network. The topic guide met the gold-standard COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) standards for cognitive interviewing. Analysis followed the thematic analytical model of cognitive interviewing. Results: Twelve people (58% male) representing six dermatological conditions from four countries participated. Overall, patients found PRIDD to be comprehensible, comprehensive, relevant, acceptable, and feasible. Participants were able to discern the conceptual framework domains from the items. Feedback resulted in: the recall period being extended from 1 week to 1 month; removal of the 'not relevant' response option; and changes to the instructions and item ordering and wording to improve clarity and increase respondents' confidence in their ability to respond. These evidence-based adjustments resulted in a 26-item version of PRIDD. Conclusion: This study met the gold-standard COSMIN criteria for the pilot testing of health measurement instruments. The data triangulated our previous findings, in particular the conceptual framework of impact. Our findings illuminate how patients understand and respond to PRIDD and other patient-reported measurement instruments. The results of comprehensibility, comprehensiveness, relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of PRIDD provide evidence of content validity from the target population. The next step in the development and validation of PRIDD is psychometric testing.

Development of a Conceptual Framework for a Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) Measure: A Qualitative Concept Elicitation Study.

Existing patient-reported outcome measures cannot comprehensively capture the full impact of living with a dermatological condition. The aim of this study was to develop a conceptual framework on which to build a new Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure. Adults (≥ 18 years of age) living with a dermatological condition, worldwide and/or representatives from a patient organization recruited via a global patient organization network, were invited to an individual or group interview. Data were analyzed thematically. Sixty-five people from 29 countries, representing 29 dermatological conditions, participated. Key themes were: (i) impacts at the individual, organizational and societal levels; (ii) impacts were point-in-time and cumulative; and (iii) impact is a multifaceted construct, with two subthemes (iiia) common impacts and (iiib) psychological and social impacts are most significant. The conceptual framework shows that impact is a multifaceted concept presenting across physical, psychological, social, financial, daily functioning and healthcare, and provides the basis for co-constructing the PRIDD with patients.

Targeted self-management limits fatigue for women undergoing radiotherapy for early breast cancer: results from the ACTIVE randomised feasibility trial.

PURPOSE: The ACTIVE intervention uses a novel fatigue propensity tool to target a behavioural fatigue self-management programme for women undergoing radiotherapy for early breast cancer. We assess feasibility and outcomes for ACTIVE. METHODS: Mixed methods comprised a randomised feasibility trial with qualitative process evaluation and a nested fatigue risk substudy. Participants at a higher risk of fatigue were allocated 2:1 to behavioural intervention or information alone. Participants at a lower risk of fatigue entered the fatigue risk substudy. Feasibility was assessed by rates of eligibility, recruitment, retention and adherence. Qualitative interviews explored acceptability of the intervention and trial processes. Measures of fatigue, anxiety, depression, quality of life and self-efficacy were self-reported before, during and 10 days, 3 weeks and 6 months after radiotherapy. Pre-treatment fatigue risk score and post-treatment fatigue were correlated. RESULTS: Fifty percent (n = 75) of eligible patients were recruited with 33 higher risk participants randomised to the trial and 42 entering the fatigue risk score substudy. Trial design and methods were feasible and acceptable with 91% of participants completing all measures according to protocol. Fatigue was clinically-significantly lower in the intervention group during, and in the weeks after, treatment compared to the control: all secondary measures favoured the intervention group. Positive group differences were not maintained at 6 months. CONCLUSION: Our targeted approach to fatigue self-management is feasible and acceptable within the early breast cancer pathway. Multiple benefits were reported by patients who received the intervention, which is worthy of further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 10303368. Registered August 2017. Health and Care Research Wales Clinical Trial Portfolio Registration 31419.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Dermatology: A Systematic Review.

By relying on data from existing patient-reported outcome measures of quality of life, the true impact of skin conditions on patients' lives may be underestimated. This study systematically reviewed all dermatology-specific (used across skin conditions) patient-reported outcome measures and makes evidence-based recommendations for their use. The study protocol is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018108829). PubMed, PsycInfo and CINAHL were searched from inception to 25 June 2018. The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) criteria were used to assess the measurement properties and methodological quality of studies. A total of 12,925 abstracts were identified. Zero patient-reported outcome measures were assigned to category A (ready for use without further validation), 31 to category B (recommended for use, but only with further validation) and 5 to category C (not recommended for use). There is no gold-standard dermatology-specific patient-reported outcome measure that can be recommended or used without caution. A new measure that can comprehensively capture the impact of dermatological conditions on the patient's life is needed.

Cancer and dementia: an exploratory study of the experience of cancer treatment in people with dementia.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with comorbid cancer and dementia have poorer outcomes than those without dementia. We observe oncology teams managing patients with dementia and memory loss and explore these patients' needs and experiences of outpatient cancer services. METHODS: A single site investigation of case study design to examine practices in four clinics using multi-methods of data collection: retrospective note review, observation, interviews, and recorded consultations. A framework analytic approach identifies themes within and across cases. RESULTS: Thirty-three clinical encounters with patients with memory loss were observed. Ten consultations were audio-recorded and 16 individuals interviewed (n = 6 patients-carer dyads, n = 1 lone patient, and n = 5 staff). Medical records were reviewed for 338 cases. Cancer referrals did not document memory health, so clinicians rely on patient/carer disclosure to identify patients with memory problems. In practice, the problem often remains hidden. Treating teams who do become aware of memory difficulties are unsure how to support patients, but marked memory loss can limit treatment options and preclude radical intent. Carers are key facilitators of successful cancer consultations and management. Their support needs are largely unrecognized. CONCLUSIONS: Training that educates cancer teams on how to identify and support individuals with memory problems before and during treatment and recognize the carer role may facilitate complex cancer care and help reduce inequalities of outcomes.