Patient Reported Outcome Measurement (PROM) under real-life conditions of non-curable cancer outpatients with the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS) and NCCN-Distress Thermometer – A mixed methods study

Eileen Ratzel , Ina Maria Pretzell , Thomas Kindler , Martin Weber , Christina Gerlach
{"title":"Patient Reported Outcome Measurement (PROM) under real-life conditions of non-curable cancer outpatients with the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS) and NCCN-Distress Thermometer – A mixed methods study","authors":"Eileen Ratzel ,&nbsp;Ina Maria Pretzell ,&nbsp;Thomas Kindler ,&nbsp;Martin Weber ,&nbsp;Christina Gerlach","doi":"10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Prospective cohort study to test the real-life feasibility of longitudinal patient-reported outcome measurement PROM (Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale IPOS, and NCCN Distress Thermometer DT) required for outpatients with non-curable lung or prostate cancer in comprehensive cancer centers.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Assessment with paper-based IPOS and DT was observed for 15 months. We analyzed response to patients' distress (requests for supportive and palliative services) following PROM. Focus groups to comprehensively explore the user experience of patients, informal caregivers and health care professionals (HCP) supplemented the analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Ninety-seven percent (125/129) of the patients received a questionnaire once, but quarterly assessment as recommended by certification committees was achieved only in 50% and 31% of prostate and lung cancer patients. Although both instruments were well accepted, only IPOS showed a high content validity, because some patients had difficulties in understanding the DT. Patients felt comfortable with completing the PROM, and HCP found PROM helped to structure the patient encounter. Due to organizational deficiencies in the handling of the instruments and operationalization of reactions to identified distress, the referrals to supportive and palliative services were rare.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>To facilitate consequences from PROM it should be a standardized intervention rather than assessment alone.</p></div><div><h3>Innovation</h3><p>The patient perspective improves the implementation of PROM under real-life clinical conditions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74407,"journal":{"name":"PEC innovation","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 100264"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772628224000128/pdfft?md5=ab7a105febacc570bc2629f46b78bf6b&pid=1-s2.0-S2772628224000128-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PEC innovation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772628224000128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Prospective cohort study to test the real-life feasibility of longitudinal patient-reported outcome measurement PROM (Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale IPOS, and NCCN Distress Thermometer DT) required for outpatients with non-curable lung or prostate cancer in comprehensive cancer centers.

Methods

Assessment with paper-based IPOS and DT was observed for 15 months. We analyzed response to patients' distress (requests for supportive and palliative services) following PROM. Focus groups to comprehensively explore the user experience of patients, informal caregivers and health care professionals (HCP) supplemented the analysis.

Results

Ninety-seven percent (125/129) of the patients received a questionnaire once, but quarterly assessment as recommended by certification committees was achieved only in 50% and 31% of prostate and lung cancer patients. Although both instruments were well accepted, only IPOS showed a high content validity, because some patients had difficulties in understanding the DT. Patients felt comfortable with completing the PROM, and HCP found PROM helped to structure the patient encounter. Due to organizational deficiencies in the handling of the instruments and operationalization of reactions to identified distress, the referrals to supportive and palliative services were rare.

Conclusion

To facilitate consequences from PROM it should be a standardized intervention rather than assessment alone.

Innovation

The patient perspective improves the implementation of PROM under real-life clinical conditions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用综合姑息治疗结果量表(IPOS)和 NCCN 压力温度计对非治愈癌症门诊患者进行真实情况下的患者报告结果测量(PROM)--一项混合方法研究
目的:进行前瞻性队列研究,测试综合癌症中心门诊不可治愈的肺癌或前列腺癌患者所需的纵向患者报告结果测量 PROM(综合姑息结果量表 IPOS 和 NCCN 痛苦温度计 DT)在现实生活中的可行性。方法:对纸质 IPOS 和 DT 进行为期 15 个月的评估。我们分析了 PROM 之后对患者痛苦(请求支持和姑息服务)的反应。结果97%(125/129)的患者接受了一次问卷调查,但只有 50% 和 31% 的前列腺癌和肺癌患者实现了认证委员会建议的季度评估。虽然两种工具都得到了广泛认可,但只有 IPOS 显示出较高的内容效度,因为一些患者在理解 DT 方面存在困难。患者对填写 PROM 感觉舒适,而 HCP 发现 PROM 有助于安排与患者的接触。由于在处理工具和对已识别的痛苦反应的操作方面存在组织缺陷,转诊到支持性和姑息服务的情况很少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
PEC innovation
PEC innovation Medicine and Dentistry (General)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
147 days
期刊最新文献
Measuring professionals' attitudes toward persistent somatic symptoms: Development, validation, and reliability of the professionals' Attitude to Persistent Somatic Symptoms Questionnaire (PAPSS) Tech + touch: A pilot study to facilitate access to health information technology for Spanish-speaking parents Single-encounter elicitation framework for diagnostic excellence patient-reported measures: SEE-Dx-PRM The effectiveness of integrating making every contact count into an undergraduate medical curriculum How often are patients recording their healthcare consultations in Australia and why? An online survey
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1