Literature DB >> 25873062

Incorporating patient-reported outcomes to improve emotional distress screening and assessment in an ambulatory oncology clinic.

Anne C Chiang1, Stephanie Buia Amport2, Diane Corjulo2, Katherine L Harvey2, Ruth McCorkle2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Assessment of distress and well-being of patients with cancer is not always documented or addressed in a clinical visit, reflecting a need for improved psychosocial screening.
METHODS: A multidisciplinary team completed process mapping for emotional distress assessment in two clinics. Barriers were identified through cause-and-effect analysis, and an intervention was chosen. Patient-reported outcomes were collected over 6 months using the validated National Comprehensive Cancer Network Emotional Distress Thermometer (EDT) paper tool. The American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) measures were compared before and after intervention.
RESULTS: During 6 months, a total of 864 tools were collected from 1,344 patients in two ambulatory clinics (64%). Electronic medical record documentation of distress increased from 19.2% to 34% during the 6 months before and after intervention. QOPI measures showed an increase in emotional well-being documentation. Of 29 new and 835 return patients, 62% indicated mild distress (EDT, 0 to 3), 18% moderate (EDT, 4 to 6), and 11% severe (EDT, 7 to 10). The average distress score of new patients was significantly higher than that of return patients (5.39 [n = 26] v 2.52 [n = 754]; P < .001). The top problems for patients with moderate and severe distress were worry, fatigue, pain, and nervousness; depression and sadness were particularly noted in patients reporting severe distress. Eleven percent of patients were referred to the social worker on site.
CONCLUSION: A pilot intervention collecting Patient-reported outcomes in two ambulatory clinics led to increase in psychosocial distress screening followed by sustained improvement, indicated by both process and QOPI measures.
Copyright © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25873062     DOI: 10.1200/JOP.2015.003954

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oncol Pract        ISSN: 1554-7477            Impact factor:   3.840


  5 in total

1.  Overview of Patient-Facing Systems in Patient-Reported Outcomes Collection: Focus and Design in Cancer Care.

Authors:  Roxanne E Jensen; Scott P Gummerson; Arlene E Chung
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.840

Review 2.  Symptom management during and after treatment with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer: A review of the literature and areas for future research.

Authors:  Heidi Mason; Mary Beth DeRubeis; Nancy Burke; Melissa Shannon; Danielle Karsies; Gregory Wolf; Avi Eisbruch; Francis Worden
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-04-10

3.  Impact of Timing on Measurement of Decision Quality and Shared Decision Making: Longitudinal Cohort Study of Breast Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Karen R Sepucha; Aisha T Langford; Jeffrey K Belkora; Yuchiao Chang; Beverly Moy; Ann H Partridge; Clara N Lee
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Using a Quality Improvement Model to Implement Distress Screening in a Community Cancer Setting.

Authors:  Nancy Jo Bush; Joy R Goebel; Kholoud Hardan-Khalil; Kayo Matsumoto
Journal:  J Adv Pract Oncol       Date:  2020-11-01

Review 5.  Use of Patient-Reported Data within the Acute Healthcare Context: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Kathryn Kynoch; Mary Ameen; Mary-Anne Ramis; Hanan Khalil
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-09-06       Impact factor: 4.614

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.