Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale Time Duration of Self-Completion Versus Assisted Completion in Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Randomized Comparison.

INTRODUCTION: To compare the time duration of self-completion (SC) of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) by patients with advanced cancer (ACPs) versus assisted completion (AC) with a health care professional. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized comparison of ACPs seen in initial consultation at the outpatient Supportive Care Center at MD Anderson, ACPs who have never completed the ESAS at MD Anderson were allocated (1:1) to either SC of the ESAS form versus AC by a nurse. Time of completion was measured by the nurse using a stopwatch. Patients completed the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM) test prior to administration of the ESAS. In the SC group, the nurse reviewed the responses to verify that the reported ESAS scores were correct. RESULTS: A total of 126 ACPs were enrolled (69 patients to AC and 57 to SC). Seventy-one patients were female, median age was 60 years, and median REALM score was 65. Median (interquartile range) time (in seconds) of SC was significantly less than AC (73 [42.9-89.1] vs. 109 [79.5-136.7], p < .0001). With nurse review time included, median time of SC increased to 117 seconds, which was not significantly different from AC (p = .28). Lower literacy (REALM) score and shortness of breath were significantly associated with increased completion time (p = .007). CONCLUSION: Regular use of ESAS will have minimal impact on clinical time, as it can be completed in about 1 minute and provides a concise yet comprehensive and multidimensional perspective of symptoms that affect quality of life of patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Because the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale can be completed in less than 2 minutes, hopefully the routine use of this simple yet comprehensive and multidimensional symptom assessment tool will be used at all medical visits in all patients with cancer so that the timely management of symptoms affecting patients' lives and treatment courses can occur, further enhancing personalized cancer care.

Patients' Perspective of Timeliness and Usefulness of an Outpatient Supportive Care Referral at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

CONTEXT: Current guidelines recommend early referral to palliative care for patients with advanced cancer; however, no studies have examined the optimal timing of referral from the patients' perspective. OBJECTIVES: To examine patients' perceptions of timeliness of referral and its association with survival among patients with advanced cancer referred to an outpatient supportive care (SC) clinic. METHODS: This cross-sectional prospective study in an SC clinic at a comprehensive cancer center included patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic cancer. Patients were asked to complete an anonymous survey regarding the timeliness and perceived usefulness of SC referral within four weeks of their first SC consultation. RESULTS: Of 253 eligible patients, 209 (83%) enrolled in the study and 200 completed the survey. Median survival was 10.3 months. Most patients (72%) perceived that referral occurred "just in time," whereas 21% felt it was "late," and 7% felt "early." A majority (83%) found the referral useful, and 88% would recommend it to other patients with cancer. The perception of being referred early was associated with lower reported levels of pain (P = 0.043), fatigue (P = 0.004), drowsiness (P = 0.005), appetite loss (P = 0.041), poor well-being (P = 0.041), and lower physical (P = 0.001) and overall symptom distress (P = 0.001). No other associations were found between perceived timeliness and usefulness and patients' baseline characteristics. CONCLUSION: Most patients with a median survival of 10 months perceived that SC referral was timely and useful. Patient care needs rather than the timing of advanced cancer diagnosis drove this perception of referral timing. Lower symptom burden was associated with the perception of being referred to early.

Perception of Helpfulness of a Question Prompt Sheet Among Cancer Patients Attending Outpatient Palliative Care.

BACKGROUND: Data on the use of question prompt sheets (QPSs) in palliative care are limited. Our team previously developed a single-page QPS using a Delphi process. The main objective of this study was to determine the perception of helpfulness of a QPS in patient-physician communication among advanced cancer outpatients. METHODS: Hundred of 104 (96%) eligible patients and 68/68 (100%) caregivers received the QPS during their first palliative care clinic. Twelve palliative medicine specialists also participated in the study. Patient and physician perceptions about the QPS were assessed at the end of the visit. Patients' anxiety was also measured before and after consultation using the Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory. RESULTS: Among the responders, most agreed that the material was helpful in communicating with their doctor (77%), clear to understand (90%), had the right amount of information (87%), and they would use a similar material in the future (76%) and recommend it to other patients (70%). Overall, 92% were satisfied with their consultation visit. Physicians perceived that the QPS was helpful in 68% of the encounters and it did not prolong the consultation in 73% of the encounters. Physician agreement on helpfulness of the QPS was not significantly different from that of the patients (P = 0.3). Patient anxiety improved after consultation from a mean (SD) Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory score of 39.2 (12.8) to 33.8 (10.7), P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The QPS was perceived as helpful in patient-physician communication among advanced cancer outpatients and it did not increase patient anxiety. Physicians similarly reported that the QPS was helpful and it did not prolong clinic visits. Further research is needed for its widespread adoption and integration into routine clinical practice.