Literature DB >> 27511000

Cancer symptom scale preferences: does one size fit all?

Kirby Jeter1, Siobhan Blackwell1, Lucy Burke1, David Joyce1,2, Catherine Moran1, Emma Victoria Conway1, Iseult Cremen1, Brenda O'Connor1,2, Pauline Ui Dhuibhir1, Declan Walsh1,2,3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Patients with advanced cancer do not report all symptoms, so assessment is best done systematically. However, for such patients, completion rates of some symptom instruments are <50%. Symptoms can be quantified by various scales including the Categorical Response Scale (CRS), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Patient preferences for CRS, NRS and VAS in symptom assessment and their clinical utility in 3 cancer symptoms: pain, tiredness and appetite loss were determined.
METHODS: A prospective survey was conducted involving cancer admissions to a 36-bed palliative care unit.
RESULTS: 100 inpatients were recruited, aged 38-93 years (x̅ =71 years; SD=11.6), with median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores of 2 (range 0-4). VAS was the least preferred measure. 52% of patients choose the same scale for all 3 symptoms and 44% for 2, with 4% choosing a different individual scale per symptom. There was moderate agreement between participant scale preference and observer determined ease of scale completion (loss of appetite: κ=0.36; pain: κ=0.49; tiredness: κ=0.45). Participants preferred CRS for appetite loss (48%) and tiredness (40%) and NRS for pain (44%).
CONCLUSIONS: VAS was the least favoured scale and should be used cautiously in this population. Most participants had a scale preference with high intrapatient consistency between scales. CRS was preferred for appetite loss and tiredness and NRS for pain. Consideration should be given to individualised cancer symptom assessment according to patient scale preference. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer; Hospice care; Symptoms and symptom management

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27511000     DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2015-001018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Support Palliat Care        ISSN: 2045-435X            Impact factor:   3.568


  3 in total

1.  Pragmatic cluster randomized trial to evaluate effectiveness and implementation of enhanced EHR-facilitated cancer symptom control (E2C2).

Authors:  Lila J Finney Rutten; Kathryn J Ruddy; Linda L Chlan; Joan M Griffin; Jeph Herrin; Aaron L Leppin; Deirdre R Pachman; Jennifer L Ridgeway; Parvez A Rahman; Curtis B Storlie; Patrick M Wilson; Andrea L Cheville
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 2.279

2.  Evaluation of the Glymphatic System With Diffusion Tensor Imaging-Along the Perivascular Space in Cancer Pain.

Authors:  Aibo Wang; Lei Chen; Can Tian; Xiaoyu Yin; Xinyue Wang; Yize Zhao; Miao Zhang; Lili Yang; Zhaoxiang Ye
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-04       Impact factor: 4.677

3.  Systematic symptom and problem assessment at admission to the palliative care ward - perspectives and prognostic impacts.

Authors:  Anja Coym; Anneke Ullrich; Lisa Kathrin Hackspiel; Mareike Ahrenholz; Carsten Bokemeyer; Karin Oechsle
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2020-05-28       Impact factor: 3.234

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.