Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes最新文献

Background: Evidence on long COVID symptom clustering patterns among patients with COVID-19 is limited. We summarized long COVID symptoms in clusters defined by number of symptoms co-occurring together, and we assessed Health-Related Quality of Life (HQRoL), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) outcomes across these clusters over time. We assessed associations between the clusters and BNT162b2 vaccination status.

Methods: A prospective longitudinal patient-reported outcomes (PRO) study recruited laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 patients seeking testing from a national retail pharmacy. Long COVID-19 symptoms were self-reported by participants at 4-week, 3-month and 6-month surveys. Patient classes identified via latent class analysis (LCA) with long COVID-19 symptoms were simplified into clusters based on number of symptoms. HRQoL and WPAI outcomes were collected using EQ-ED-5L and WPAI: GH questionnaires. Mixed models for repeated measures analyses were conducted to examine associations between exposure groups and outcomes.

Results: The study included 328 participants that were segmented into three groups of long COVID-19 symptoms based on LCA and then simplified by the number of symptoms (Cluster 1 low, <2; Cluster 2 moderate, 2-6; and Cluster 3 high, >6 symptoms). The number of long COVID-19 symptoms was negatively associated with HRQoL and WPAI, whereby participants with high symptom burden (>6 symptoms) had the lowest HRQoL and WPAI scores assessed by absenteeism, presenteeism, work productivity loss, activity impairment, and hours worked metrics. Compared with those unvaccinated and not up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccination, subjects boosted with BNT162b2 consistently reported less symptom burden during the follow-up, regardless of their symptom-based cluster.

Conclusion: Three distinct patient clusters based on frequency of long COVID symptoms experienced different HRQoL and WPAI outcomes over 6 months. The cluster with more concomitant symptoms experienced greater burden than the others. Participants up-to-date with BNT162b2 reported lower symptom burden across all clusters and timeframes.

Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05160636.

Background: The commonly used ('legacy') PROMs evaluating outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA), have several limitations regarding their measurement properties and interpretation of scores. One innovation in PROMs is the use of Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS^®) is a validated system of CATs. The aim of this study was to assess the measurement properties of PROMIS and legacy instruments in patients undergoing THA.

Methodology: Patients in this multicenter study filled out a questionnaire twice, including Dutch-Flemish PROMIS v1.2 Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) and v1.1 Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) CATs and short forms, PROMIS v1.0 Pain Intensity, and legacy PROMs (Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), HOOS-Physical function Shortform (HOOS-PS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), and two numeric rating scales measuring pain). The reliability, measurement precision (Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)), smallest detectable change (SDC), and burden of PROMIS instruments were presented head-to-head to legacy PROMs. Furthermore, construct validity was assessed.

Results: 208 patients were included. All instruments had a sufficient test-retest reliability (range ICC: 0.83-0.96). The SEM of PROMIS CATs and short forms ranged from 1.8 to 2.2 T-score points, the SEM of legacy instruments 2.6-11.1. The SDC of PROMIS instruments ranged from 2.1 to 7.3 T-score points, the SDC of legacy instruments 7.2-30.9. The construct validity of PROMIS CAT and short forms were found sufficient, except for the PROMIS-PI short form. The burden of PROMIS CATs was smaller than PROMIS short forms (range 4.8-5.2 versus 8-20 items, respectively). The burden of legacy instruments measuring physical functioning ranged from 5 to 40 items.

Conclusions: The PROMIS-PF is less burdensome, with high measurement precision, and almost no minimal or maximal scores, and an equal reliability compared to legacy instruments measuring physical functioning in patients undergoing THA. The PROMIS Pain Intensity 1a is comparable to the legacy pain instruments in terms of burden, reliability and SDC. Measuring the construct Pain Interference may not have additional value in this population because of its high correlation with instruments measuring physical functioning. The SDC values presented in this study can be used for individual patient monitoring.

Introduction: The Utrecht Symptom Diary (USD) is a validated Dutch patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) tool - based on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System - to assess and monitor symptoms in cancer patients. The USD contains 11 items concerning frequently occurring symptoms in cancer patients (pain, sleeping problems, dry mouth, dysphagia, lack of appetite, abnormal stool, nausea, shortness of breath, fatigue, anxiety and depressed mood) and an item on overall well-being. For the outpatient USD 11 items concerning frequently occurring signs and symptoms in patients receiving chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy were added to the USD: taste alteration, oral pain, weight loss, diarrhoea, hair changes, skin problems, nail problems, eye problems, tingling, concentration problems and problems with sexuality. This current study aimed to evaluate the 11 added items on this treatment specific outpatient USD in cancer patients receiving intravenous chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy.

Methods: Observational longitudinal retrospective cohort study including all adult outpatients with cancer receiving intravenous chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy in an academic hospital in the Netherlands who completed at least one outpatient USD as part of routine care (2012-2021). Relevance, comprehensiveness as well as criterion and construct validity were assessed.

Results: 1733 patients who completed ≥ 1 outpatient USD during intravenous chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy were included for analysis. Relevance as well as comprehensiveness of the items on the outpatient USD in this patient population was shown. Criterion validation was demonstrated for all added items of the outpatient USD - except for the item on oral pain. An additional analysis showed that mouth problems were detected with both outpatient USD items oral pain and dry mouth. Construct validity was demonstrated for the items hair changes and skin and nail problems. Construct validity on eye problems was not tested due to the low number of paired outpatient USDs.

Conclusions: The treatment specific outpatient USD is a validated PROM in outpatients with cancer receiving intravenous chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy. Considering its validity in this broad group of patients, we think the treatment-specific outpatient USD is widely applicable. In addition to providing tailored supportive symptom care, the USD-data can be used to increase knowledge about symptom burden in daily practice in this population.

Background: Current acute healthcare service metrics are not meaningful for older people living with frailty. Healthcare knowledge, situational security, and physical and psychosocial function are important outcomes typically not collected. The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) could support these assessments. Existing instruments are not comprehensive as they typically consider function, while older people with frailty also value enablement (self-determination and security in health and healthcare). This study field-tested and validated a PROM for older people with frailty receiving acute care (PROM-OPAC) to measure enablement.

Methods: People aged 65+ with Clinical Frailty Scale 5-8 were recruited within seventy-two hours of an emergency attendance. Iterations of the novel instrument were administered over three stages: (1) preliminary field-testing for reliability (response distribution and internal consistency) and structure (exploratory factor analysis, EFA); (2) intermediate field-testing of an improved instrument for reliability and structure; (3) final draft validation assessing reliability, structure (confirmatory factor analysis, CFA), and construct validity based on a priori hypotheses. Feasibility was appraised throughout using data completeness and response rates and times.

Results: 241 people participated. Three items of a preliminary seven-item measure had poor response distribution or loading and were accordingly improved. The intermediate instrument had interpretability issues and three items required further improvement. The final eight-item draft had acceptable reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.71), structure (two factors for self-determination and security; RMSEA: 0.065; TLI: 0.917; CFI: 0.944), and construct validity (lower scores from respondents waiting longer and requiring admission). Feasibility was promising (response rate 39%; 98% responses complete; median completion time 11 (IQR: 12) minutes).

Conclusions: Administration of the PROM-OPAC appeared feasible and the instrument had acceptable psychometric properties. Further evaluation is required to assess generalisability.

Background: Medication non-adherence is a common issue in chronic illness. The World Health Organization has recognized a need for a valid and reliable method of measuring adherence to understand and mitigate non-adherence. This study aimed to psychometrically evaluate the English version of the Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ©), a questionnaire designed to assess patient-reported medication adherence across multiple therapy areas, in patients with Osteoarthritis (OA).

Methodology: Data from the Adelphi OA Disease Specific Programme™, a survey of physicians and their consulting adult patients with OA conducted in the United States, November 2020 to March 2021, was used to assess the psychometric properties of the ADAQ. Patients completed the ADAQ, Adherence to Refills and Medication Scale (ARMS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and EQ-5D-3L. The measurement model of the 13-item ADAQ was assessed and refined using latent variable modelling (Multiple Indicator Multiple Cause, confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses, item response theory, Mokken scaling, and bifactor analyses). Correlational analyses (Spearman's rank and polyserial as appropriate) with ARMS, WOMAC, and EQ-5D-3L scores assessed construct validity. Anchor- and distribution-based analyses were performed to estimate between-group clinically important differences (CID).

Results: Overall, 723 patients were included in this analysis (54.5% female, 69.0% aged ≥ 60). Latent variable modelling indicated a unidimensional reflective model was appropriate, with a bifactor model confirming an 11-item essentially unidimensional score. Items 12 and 13 were excluded from scoring as they measured a different concept. The ADAQ had high internal reliability with omega hierarchical and Cronbach's alpha coefficients of 0.89 and 0.97, respectively. Convergent validity was supported by moderate correlations with items of the ARMS, and physician-reported adherence and compliance. Mean differences in ADAQ score between high and low adherence groups yielded CID estimates between 0.49 and 1.05 points, with a correlation-weighted average of 0.81 points.

Conclusion: This scoring model showed strong construct validity and internal consistency reliability when assessing medication adherence in OA. Future work should focus on confirming validity across a range of disease areas.

Background: The integration of patient-centered care (PCC) and value-based healthcare (VBHC) principles, emphasizing personalized, responsive care and cost efficiency, is crucial in modern healthcare. Despite advocation from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) for the global adoption of these principles through patient-reported measures (PRMs), their implementation, especially the pregnancy and childbirth (PCB) set, remains limited in maternity care. This study focuses on understanding the optimal organizational entity for integrating standard ICHOM-PCB-PRMs into routine maternity care in Finland. It aims to clarify the distribution of tasks among stakeholders and gather Finnish maternity healthcare professionals' perspectives on organizational responsibility in PRM collection. The emphasis was on identifying the optimal organizational framework for managing PRMs in maternity care.

Results: A total of 66 maternity healthcare professionals participated in the study, reaching a consensus that public maternity care centers in Finland should be the primary entity responsible for managing PRMs in the maternity sector. Key aspects such as confidence with the role as a mother, maternal confidence with breastfeeding, and satisfaction with the result of care were identified as crucial and should be inquired about in both public maternity care centers and hospital maternity wards. The findings highlight the importance of comprehensive and consistent attention to these PRMs across public maternity care centers and hospital maternity settings to ensure holistic and effective maternal care.

Conclusions: The study highlights the central role of public maternity care centers in the collection and management of PRMs within Finnish maternity care, as agreed upon by the professional consensus. It underscores the importance of a consistent and holistic approach to PRM inquiry across different care settings to enhance the quality and effectiveness of maternity care. This finding is crucial for policymakers and healthcare practitioners, suggesting that reinforcing the collaborative efforts between public maternity care centers and hospital maternity wards is vital for a patient-centric, efficient healthcare system. Aligning with PCC and VBHC principles, this approach aims to improve healthcare outcomes for pregnant and postpartum women in Finland, emphasizing the need for a unified strategy in managing maternity care.

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the psychometric properties of the Spanish-language version of the HIV-Symptom Index (HIV-SI) questionnaire in Spanish patients undergoing antiretroviral therapy.

Methods: Between 2014 and 2016, an observational, multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted in seventeen Spanish hospitals to validate HIV-SI questionnaire in terms of: construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), convergent validity (Pearson's correlation coefficient) and Known-group validity. In addition, a sensitivity to change analysis was also performed.

Results: A total of 232 patients were included in the study. They had a mean age of 46.17 (SD9.82) and were 75% male. The median overall score for the HIV-SI was 10 (IQR 4- 19.5) and the most common symptoms reported were feelings of nervousness or anxiety, fatigue or energy loss, feeling sad or depressed, stomach pain or bloating, and difficulty sleeping. In the current study, the Spanish HIV-SI questionnaire showed a high internal consistency (α = 0.89) and adequate construct validity (CFI and TLI > 0.90). When contrasted with the MOS-HIV questionnaire, an inverse correlation was found. It showed a good association with the mental (r=-0.61; P < 0.0001) and physical score (r=-0.60; P < 0.0001). In a multivariate analysis, the age of the patient, female condition, hepatitis C coinfection, concomitant treatment and non-adherence resulted in a higher HIV-SI score.

Conclusions: Our study has shown that the Spanish HIV-SI is a valid and reliable self-administered PROM for routine measurement of patient- reported symptoms among Spanish patients on antiretroviral treatment.

Purpose: Patient experience is fundamental to Patient-Centered Care (PCC). Although prior bibliometric research studies have focused on various aspects of PCC, a comprehensive analysis of PREM articles is required to understand its impact on the clinical practices. This study aims to analyze the top 100 most-cited PREM articles to examine the critical studies and related trends.

Methods: The 100 most cited articles on PREM were gathered from the Web of Science using a combination keyword search approach. The following information was extracted: study design, sample size, topic, number of citations, authorship, country, year of publication, journal title, and dimensions included in these PREM instruments. The VOSviewer software was used to generate graphical bibliometric networks.

Results: The citation count of the top 100 PREM articles varied from 20 to 775 citations. 21 articles had received a minimum of 100 citations. All the articles were in English, and out of these 45% were from the USA. The cross-sectional study (69%) was the most common study design, and the impact of treatment (44%) was the most frequent topic. The common PREM instruments used were customized PREM questionnaires (16%) and HCAHPS (10%).

Conclusion: This bibliometric research showed that the area of PREM is far from being saturated. The authors have attempted to provide an overview of global PREM research. Future research should focus on studies from underdeveloped and developing countries to develop condition-specific PREM tools. Longitudinal researches among special populations and studies in day-care and outpatient settings are recommended in future.

Background: Lupus nephritis (LN), a severe organ manifestation of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), significantly impacts health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) and Lupus Quality of Life (LupusQoL) have been validated to measure HRQoL in SLE, but not specifically in LN. Patient-reported symptoms of LN are not well-reported. We assessed the content validity and relevance of these measures in evaluating patients with LN and their LN-related experiences.

Methods: This qualitative, interview-based study enrolled patients with LN from three US sites from a larger, retrospective survey study. The interview comprised an open-ended concept elicitation part and a more structured cognitive part. Concept elicitation was used to identify relevant themes describing the patients' experiences. Patients were asked to describe their LN-related symptoms, the severity and impact of those symptoms and their satisfaction with treatment. A cognitive interview approach evaluated the appropriate understanding of the items, instructions, and response options and asked patients about their understanding of the FACIT-Fatigue or LupusQoL measures, their relevance to the condition, and any aspects of confusion or need for better clarity of the questionnaires. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. The concept elicitation data were coded, while the cognitive interview data were tabulated to present the participants' responses next to the interview questions to support the evaluation of their understanding of the questionnaire items.

Results: Overall, 10 patients participated in FACIT-Fatigue and another 10 in LupusQoL interviews; 18 patients were female, 10 were Black (self-reported) and 17 were receiving maintenance treatment for LN with stable disease activity. When patients recalled their symptoms, 670 expressions of varying symptoms were reported. All patients described pain, discomfort, and energy-related symptoms. Urinary frequency and non-joint swelling were most frequently attributed to LN rather than SLE. Patients felt the questions asked in the FACIT-Fatigue and LupusQoL surveys were relevant to their LN experience.

Conclusions: The symptoms reported by patients with LN were consistent with symptoms reported by the overall SLE population. However, patients indicated that some symptoms of LN were more profound than symptoms of SLE alone, affecting a broad range of areas of daily life activity and resulting in a higher burden on their HRQoL. FACIT-Fatigue and LupusQoL demonstrated content relevance as meaningful tools for patients with LN. However, further quantitative data collection is needed to ensure that these patient-reported outcome tools demonstrate good measurement properties in an LN population.

Background: Using Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in clinical settings can improve patient outcomes by enhancing communication between patient and provider. There has been significant improvements in the development of PROMs, their implementation in routine patient clinical care, training physicians and other healthcare providers to interpret the PROMs results to identify any issues reported by the patient, and to use the PROMs results to provide or modify the treatment.

Main body: Despite the increased use of PROMs, the lack of PROM completion by patients is a major concern in the optimal use of PROMs. Studies have shown several reasons why patients do not complete PROMs and one of the reasons is their lack of understanding of the significance of PROMs and their utility in their clinical care. While examining the various strategies that can be used to improve the uptake of PROM completion by patients, educating patients about the use of PROMs has been recommended. There is less evidence on how patients are trained or educated about PROMs. It may also be possible that the patient education strategies are not reported in the publications. This brings up the question of evaluation of the educational strategies used.

Conclusion: Our symposium at the 2023 ISOQOL conference brought together a range of experiences and learning around patient-centered PROMs educational activities used in the Netherlands, Canada, and the UK. This commentary is aimed to describe the lay of the land about educational activities around the use of PROMs in clinical care for patients, recognizing the gaps, and posing questions to be considered by the research and clinical community.