推进以患者为中心的癌症护理:患者报告结果电子测量系统回顾。

IF 1.3 Q3 REHABILITATION Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences Pub Date : 2024-09-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fresc.2024.1427712
Hosna Salmani, Somayeh Nasiri, Mahdi Alemrajabi, Maryam Ahmadi
{"title":"推进以患者为中心的癌症护理:患者报告结果电子测量系统回顾。","authors":"Hosna Salmani, Somayeh Nasiri, Mahdi Alemrajabi, Maryam Ahmadi","doi":"10.3389/fresc.2024.1427712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) have emerged as valuable tools in cancer care, facilitating the comprehensive assessment of patients' physical, psychological, and social well-being. This study synthesizes literature on the utilization of ePROMs in oncology, highlighting the diverse array of measurement instruments and questionnaires employed in cancer patient assessments. By comprehensively analyzing existing research, this study provides insights into the landscape of ePROMs, informs future research directions, and aims to optimize patient-centred oncology care through the strategic integration of ePROMs into clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted by searching peer-reviewed articles published in academic journals without time limitations up to 2024. The search was performed across multiple electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, using predefined search terms related to cancer, measurement instruments, and patient assessment. The selected articles underwent a rigorous quality assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review of 85 studies revealed a diverse range of measurement instruments and questionnaires utilized in cancer patient assessments. Prominent instruments such as the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Patient Reported Outcome-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) were frequently referenced across multiple studies. Additionally, other instruments identified included generic health-related quality of life measures and disease-specific assessments tailored to particular cancer types. The findings indicated the importance of utilizing a variety of measurement tools to comprehensively assess the multifaceted needs and experiences of cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our systematic review provides a comprehensive examination of the varied tools and ePROMs employed in cancer care, accentuating the perpetual requirement for development and validation. Prominent instruments like the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PRO-CTCAE are underscored, emphasizing the necessity for a thorough assessment to meet the multifaceted needs of patients. Looking ahead, scholarly endeavours should prioritize the enhancement of existing tools and the creation of novel measures to adeptly address the evolving demands of cancer patients across heterogeneous settings and populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":73102,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences","volume":"5 ","pages":"1427712"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11461464/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing patient-centered cancer care: a systematic review of electronic patient-reported outcome measures.\",\"authors\":\"Hosna Salmani, Somayeh Nasiri, Mahdi Alemrajabi, Maryam Ahmadi\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fresc.2024.1427712\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) have emerged as valuable tools in cancer care, facilitating the comprehensive assessment of patients' physical, psychological, and social well-being. This study synthesizes literature on the utilization of ePROMs in oncology, highlighting the diverse array of measurement instruments and questionnaires employed in cancer patient assessments. By comprehensively analyzing existing research, this study provides insights into the landscape of ePROMs, informs future research directions, and aims to optimize patient-centred oncology care through the strategic integration of ePROMs into clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted by searching peer-reviewed articles published in academic journals without time limitations up to 2024. The search was performed across multiple electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, using predefined search terms related to cancer, measurement instruments, and patient assessment. The selected articles underwent a rigorous quality assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review of 85 studies revealed a diverse range of measurement instruments and questionnaires utilized in cancer patient assessments. Prominent instruments such as the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Patient Reported Outcome-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) were frequently referenced across multiple studies. Additionally, other instruments identified included generic health-related quality of life measures and disease-specific assessments tailored to particular cancer types. The findings indicated the importance of utilizing a variety of measurement tools to comprehensively assess the multifaceted needs and experiences of cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our systematic review provides a comprehensive examination of the varied tools and ePROMs employed in cancer care, accentuating the perpetual requirement for development and validation. Prominent instruments like the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PRO-CTCAE are underscored, emphasizing the necessity for a thorough assessment to meet the multifaceted needs of patients. Looking ahead, scholarly endeavours should prioritize the enhancement of existing tools and the creation of novel measures to adeptly address the evolving demands of cancer patients across heterogeneous settings and populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"1427712\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11461464/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2024.1427712\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2024.1427712","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:电子患者报告结果测量(ePROMs)已成为癌症护理的重要工具,有助于对患者的身体、心理和社会福祉进行全面评估。本研究综述了有关在肿瘤学中使用电子患者报告结果的文献,重点介绍了在癌症患者评估中使用的各种测量工具和问卷。通过对现有研究的全面分析,本研究深入了解了电子PROM的现状,为未来的研究方向提供了参考,并旨在通过将电子PROM战略性地融入临床实践,优化以患者为中心的肿瘤治疗:通过检索 2024 年之前学术期刊上发表的无时间限制的同行评审文章,进行了系统性综述。检索在多个电子数据库中进行,包括PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science,检索时使用了与癌症、测量工具和患者评估相关的预定义检索词。所选文章使用混合方法评估工具(MMAT)进行了严格的质量评估:对 85 项研究的综述显示,癌症患者评估中使用的测量工具和问卷多种多样。欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织生活质量问卷核心 30(EORTC QLQ-C30)和患者报告结果-不良事件通用术语标准(PRO-CTCAE)等著名工具在多项研究中被频繁引用。此外,其他已确定的工具包括通用的健康相关生活质量测量方法和针对特定癌症类型的疾病特异性评估。研究结果表明,利用各种测量工具全面评估癌症患者的多方面需求和经历非常重要:我们的系统综述对癌症护理中使用的各种工具和 ePROM 进行了全面检查,强调了开发和验证的长期要求。我们对 EORTC QLQ-C30 和 PRO-CTCAE 等著名工具进行了强调,强调了进行全面评估以满足患者多方面需求的必要性。展望未来,学术界应优先考虑改进现有工具和创建新的测量方法,以妥善解决不同环境和人群中癌症患者不断变化的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Advancing patient-centered cancer care: a systematic review of electronic patient-reported outcome measures.

Background: Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) have emerged as valuable tools in cancer care, facilitating the comprehensive assessment of patients' physical, psychological, and social well-being. This study synthesizes literature on the utilization of ePROMs in oncology, highlighting the diverse array of measurement instruments and questionnaires employed in cancer patient assessments. By comprehensively analyzing existing research, this study provides insights into the landscape of ePROMs, informs future research directions, and aims to optimize patient-centred oncology care through the strategic integration of ePROMs into clinical practice.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted by searching peer-reviewed articles published in academic journals without time limitations up to 2024. The search was performed across multiple electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, using predefined search terms related to cancer, measurement instruments, and patient assessment. The selected articles underwent a rigorous quality assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).

Results: The review of 85 studies revealed a diverse range of measurement instruments and questionnaires utilized in cancer patient assessments. Prominent instruments such as the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Patient Reported Outcome-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) were frequently referenced across multiple studies. Additionally, other instruments identified included generic health-related quality of life measures and disease-specific assessments tailored to particular cancer types. The findings indicated the importance of utilizing a variety of measurement tools to comprehensively assess the multifaceted needs and experiences of cancer patients.

Conclusion: Our systematic review provides a comprehensive examination of the varied tools and ePROMs employed in cancer care, accentuating the perpetual requirement for development and validation. Prominent instruments like the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PRO-CTCAE are underscored, emphasizing the necessity for a thorough assessment to meet the multifaceted needs of patients. Looking ahead, scholarly endeavours should prioritize the enhancement of existing tools and the creation of novel measures to adeptly address the evolving demands of cancer patients across heterogeneous settings and populations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Case Report: Rehabilitation of a giant meniscus cyst with a mixed tear. Preliminary development and evaluation of a mechanical handwriting assistive device to support individuals with movement disorders. Caregiver perceptions of usual care home programs for persons with acquired brain injury: a qualitative descriptive study. Underutilization of coper/non-coper screening in anterior cruciate ligament injuries management in Italy: an online survey. Validation of a tri-axial accelerometer for measuring physical activity in patients with subacute stroke.
×
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