Literature DB >> 27365012

Patient-reported outcomes questionnaire compliance in Cancer Cooperative Group Trials (Alliance N0992).

Pamela J Atherton1, Kelli N Burger2, Levi D Pederson2, Suneetha Kaggal2, Jeff A Sloan2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials is a focal point for research and policy. Non-compliance with planned questionnaires and missing data can threaten both internal validity and generalizability. This retrospective analysis was conducted to determine the extent of, and characteristics associated with, missing patient-reported outcomes.
METHODS: Study characteristics, patient characteristics and adverse events, and reasons for non-compliance were compiled from 14 closed Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, or Mayo Clinic Cancer Research Consortium clinical trials. Compliance rates were calculated for each patient using the number of booklets completed while the patient was on trial divided by the number of booklets the patient was expected to complete. Frequency counts and summary statistics were compiled. Logistic regression techniques were employed.
RESULTS: The 1640 included patients had a median age of 58 years and were mostly White (90.8%) and female (73.8%). Compliance rates per study ranged from 84.7% to 97.2%. The primary endpoint of overall compliance rate was 93.1%. A total of 1267 patients were compliant. Those non-compliant were slightly older (mean = 58.6 vs 57.5, p = 0.03) and had different types of cancers (p < 0.01). There were no differences in compliance according to tumor status (p = 0.66), clinical stage (p = 0.81), baseline quality of life (p = 0.42 for ≥8 vs <8 and p = 0.12 for ≥6 vs <6), or maximum adverse event grade incidence (p = 0.33 for grade 2+ incidence and p = 0.36 for grade 3+ incidence). Reasons for non-compliance included patient refusal (N = 136), booklet not administered to patient (N = 199), no clinic visit at the scheduled time for booklet completion (N = 40), and at-home-completed booklet not returned (N = 224). Logistic regression indicates gender (p < 0.01), race (p < 0.01), performance score (p = 0.02), dose delay status (p = 0.01), and incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse event (p = 0.03) were correlates of compliance.
CONCLUSION: Patient-reported outcomes have successfully been implemented into Alliance and Mayo Clinic trials with high rates of patient compliance. Further improvement in compliance can be made with staff commitment and education. Patients are typically non-compliant only when the task at hand is burdensome, unclear, or logistically challenging. Existing tracking systems used for the other trial outcomes should be utilized to ensure successful capture of patient-reported outcomes.
© The Author(s) 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Patient-reported outcomes; compliance rates; quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27365012      PMCID: PMC5133154          DOI: 10.1177/1740774516655101

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  12 in total

1.  The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute--promoting better information, decisions, and health.

Authors:  A Eugene Washington; Steven H Lipstein
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-10-13       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Missing data in clinical studies: issues and methods.

Authors:  Joseph G Ibrahim; Haitao Chu; Ming-Hui Chen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Eliciting survey cooperation: incentives, self-interest, and norms of cooperation.

Authors:  Martha E Kropf; Johnny Blair
Journal:  Eval Rev       Date:  2005-12

4.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.

Authors:  Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 6.317

Review 5.  Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations.

Authors:  Claire F Snyder; Neil K Aaronson; Ali K Choucair; Thomas E Elliott; Joanne Greenhalgh; Michele Y Halyard; Rachel Hess; Deborah M Miller; Bryce B Reeve; Maria Santana
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-11-03       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Completion rates in health-related quality-of-life assessment: approach of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group.

Authors:  D Osoba; B Zee
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998 Mar 15-Apr 15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 7.  Integrating patient-reported outcomes into cancer symptom management clinical trials supported by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials networks.

Authors:  Jeff A Sloan; Lawrence Berk; Joseph Roscoe; Michael J Fisch; Edward G Shaw; Gwen Wyatt; Gary R Morrow; Amylou C Dueck
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Symptom Monitoring With Patient-Reported Outcomes During Routine Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Ethan Basch; Allison M Deal; Mark G Kris; Howard I Scher; Clifford A Hudis; Paul Sabbatini; Lauren Rogak; Antonia V Bennett; Amylou C Dueck; Thomas M Atkinson; Joanne F Chou; Dorothy Dulko; Laura Sit; Allison Barz; Paul Novotny; Michael Fruscione; Jeff A Sloan; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Practical problems with the collection and interpretation of serial quality of life assessments in patients with malignant glioma.

Authors:  M Walker; J Brown; K Brown; A Gregor; I R Whittle; R Grant
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.130

10.  Pretreatment quality of life is an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in patients with advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Yingwei Qi; Steven E Schild; Sumithra J Mandrekar; Angelina D Tan; James E Krook; Kendrith M Rowland; Yolanda I Garces; Gamini S Soori; Alex A Adjei; Jeff A Sloan
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 15.609

View more
  4 in total

1.  Do reminder emails and past due notifications improve patient completion and institutional data submission for patient-reported outcome measures?

Authors:  Stephanie L Pugh; Joseph P Rodgers; Jennifer Moughan; Roseann Bonanni; Jaskaran Boparai; Ronald C Chen; James J Dignam; Deborah W Bruner
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2020-09-07       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  A phase III randomized-controlled, single-blind trial to improve quality of life with stereotactic body radiotherapy for patients with painful bone metastases (ROBOMET).

Authors:  Carole Mercier; Piet Dirix; Piet Ost; Charlotte Billiet; Ines Joye; Peter Vermeulen; Yolande Lievens; Dirk Verellen
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 4.430

3.  Compliance with patient-reported outcome assessment in glioma patients: predictors for drop out.

Authors:  Mirjam Renovanz; Marlene Hechtner; Karoline Kohlmann; Mareile Janko; Minou Nadji-Ohl; Susanne Singer; Florian Ringel; Jan Coburger; Anne-Katrin Hickmann
Journal:  Neurooncol Pract       Date:  2017-10-31

4.  Challenges in Acceptance and Compliance in Digital Health Assessments During Pregnancy: Prospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Katharina Brusniak; Hannah Maria Arndt; Manuel Feisst; Kathrin Haßdenteufel; Lina Maria Matthies; Thomas Maximilian Deutsch; Hannes Hudalla; Harald Abele; Markus Wallwiener; Stephanie Wallwiener
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2020-10-14       Impact factor: 4.773

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.