Literature DB >> 28849277

Patient-reported outcome use in oncology: a systematic review of the impact on patient-clinician communication.

L Y Yang1, D S Manhas1, A F Howard2, R A Olson3,4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an increasingly popular tool to optimize care and bridge the gap between patient experience and clinician understanding. The aim of this review was to identify mechanisms through which PROs facilitate patient-clinician communication in the adult oncology population.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the published literature using the following data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cab Direct, and CDSR. Studies included in this review reported on the outcomes of PRO use, used PROs as an intervention and not as a study outcome measurement tool, included cancer patients or survivors as study participants, and analyzed patient-clinician communication.
RESULTS: We identified 610 unique records, of which 43 publications met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Synthesis of the reviewed studies provided evidence of the usefulness of PROs in facilitating patient-clinician communication on a variety of topics. We identified mechanisms though which PROs influenced patient-clinician communication to include increasing symptom awareness, prompting discussion, streamlining consultations, and facilitating inter-professional communication. Barriers to PRO use in communication improvement include technical problems impeding its administration and completion, compliance issues due to lack of incentive or forgetfulness, and use of PROs that do not appropriately assess issues relevant to the patient. Facilitators include increased education on PRO use, using PRO tools that patients find more acceptable, and providing patient data summaries in an easily accessible format for clinicians.
CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggests that PROs facilitate patient-clinician communication through various mechanisms that could perhaps contribute to improvements in symptom management and survival. The impact of PROs on clinical outcomes, however, remains poorly studied.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Barriers to use; Oncology; Patient-reported outcome measures; Patient-reported outcomes; Physician-patient communication; Systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28849277     DOI: 10.1007/s00520-017-3865-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Support Care Cancer        ISSN: 0941-4355            Impact factor:   3.603


  57 in total

1.  Searching for information on outcomes: do you need to be comprehensive?

Authors:  A J Brettle; A F Long; M J Grant; J Greenhalgh
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1998-09

2.  Using the symptom monitor in a randomized controlled trial: the effect on symptom prevalence and severity.

Authors:  Johanna Hoekstra; Rien de Vos; Nico P van Duijn; Egbert Schadé; Patrick J E Bindels
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.612

3.  Health-related quality-of-life assessments and patient-physician communication: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Symone B Detmar; Martin J Muller; Jan H Schornagel; Lidwina D V Wever; Neil K Aaronson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-12-18       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Impact of computerized quality of life screening on physician behaviour and patient satisfaction in lung cancer outpatients.

Authors:  P Taenzer; B D Bultz; L E Carlson; M Speca; T DeGagne; K Olson; R Doll; Z Rosberger
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2000 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.894

5.  Patient online self-reporting of toxicity symptoms during chemotherapy.

Authors:  Ethan Basch; David Artz; Dorothy Dulko; Kevin Scher; Paul Sabbatini; Martee Hensley; Nandita Mitra; John Speakman; Mary McCabe; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-05-20       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Telephone-linked care for cancer symptom monitoring: a pilot study.

Authors:  Kathi H Mooney; Susan L Beck; Robert H Friedman; Ramesh Farzanfar
Journal:  Cancer Pract       Date:  2002 May-Jun

7.  Usability of a computerized PAINReportIt in the general public with pain and people with cancer pain.

Authors:  Diana J Wilkie; M Kay M Judge; Donna L Berry; Jean Dell; Shiping Zong; Rudy Gilespie
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.612

Review 8.  The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice: lack of impact or lack of theory?

Authors:  Joanne Greenhalgh; Andrew F Long; Rob Flynn
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.634

9.  Computerized symptom and quality-of-life assessment for patients with cancer part II: acceptability and usability.

Authors:  Kristin H Mullen; Donna L Berry; Brenda K Zierler
Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum       Date:  2004-09-17       Impact factor: 2.172

10.  Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Galina Velikova; Laura Booth; Adam B Smith; Paul M Brown; Pamela Lynch; Julia M Brown; Peter J Selby
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-02-15       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  42 in total

1.  The National MDS Natural History Study: design of an integrated data and sample biorepository to promote research studies in myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  Mikkael A Sekeres; Steven D Gore; Donald M Stablein; Nancy DiFronzo; Gregory A Abel; Amy E DeZern; Jesse D Troy; Dana E Rollison; John W Thomas; Myron A Waclawiw; Jane Jijun Liu; Tareq Al Baghdadi; Matthew J Walter; Rafael Bejar; Edward J Gorak; Daniel T Starczynowski; James M Foran; James R Cerhan; Lynn C Moscinski; Rami S Komrokji; H Joachim Deeg; Pearlie K Epling-Burnette
Journal:  Leuk Lymphoma       Date:  2019-05-21

2.  Patient-clinician communication among patients with stage I lung cancer.

Authors:  Shannon M Nugent; Sara E Golden; Charles R Thomas; Mark E Deffebach; Mithran S Sukumar; Paul H Schipper; Brandon H Tieu; Drew Moghanaki; Juan Wisnivesky; Christopher Slatore
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  COVID-19 Emergency and the Need to Speed Up the Adoption of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Laura Marandino; Andrea Necchi; Massimo Aglietta; Massimo Di Maio
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2020-05-01

4.  Feasibility of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessment for cancer patients using electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) in daily clinical practice.

Authors:  Guillaume Mouillet; Antoine Falcoz; Joëlle Fritzsch; Hamadi Almotlak; Pascale Jacoulet; Xavier Pivot; Cristian Villanueva; Laura Mansi; Stefano Kim; Elsa Curtit; Nathalie Meneveau; Olivier Adotevi; Marine Jary; Guillaume Eberst; Angelique Vienot; Fabien Calcagno; Astrid Pozet; Oumelkheir Djoumakh; Christophe Borg; Virginie Westeel; Amélie Anota; Sophie Paget-Bailly
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  A catalyst for transforming health systems and person-centred care: Canadian national position statement on patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  S Ahmed; L Barbera; S J Bartlett; D G Bebb; M Brundage; S Bryan; W Y Cheung; N Coburn; T Crump; L Cuthbertson; D Howell; A F Klassen; S Leduc; M Li; N E Mayo; G McKinnon; R Olson; J Pink; J W Robinson; M J Santana; R Sawatzky; R S Moxam; S Sinclair; F Servidio-Italiano; W Temple
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 3.677

6.  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

7.  The usefulness of the Electronic Patient Visit Assessment (ePVA)© as a clinical support tool for real-time interventions in head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Janet H Van Cleave; Mei R Fu; Antonia V Bennett; Catherine Concert; Ann Riccobene; Anh Tran; Allison Most; Maria Kamberi; Jacqueline Mojica; Justin Savitski; Elise Kusche; Mark S Persky; Zujun Li; Adam S Jacobson; Kenneth S Hu; Michael J Persky; Eva Liang; Patricia M Corby; Brian L Egleston
Journal:  Mhealth       Date:  2021-01-20

8.  Could existing infrastructure for using patient-reported outcomes as quality measures also be used for individual care in patients with colorectal cancer?

Authors:  Clara Breidenbach; Christoph Kowalski; Simone Wesselmann; Nora Tabea Sibert
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Patient-reported outcome measures in oncology: a qualitative study of the healthcare professional's perspective.

Authors:  Caitlin Graupner; S O Breukink; S Mul; D Claessens; A H M Slok; M L Kimman
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 3.603

10.  A qualitative study on professionals' attitudes and views towards the introduction of patient reported measures into public maternity care pathway.

Authors:  An Chen; Kirsi Väyrynen; Riikka-Leena Leskelä; Seppo Heinonen; Paul Lillrank; Aydin Tekay; Paulus Torkki
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-07-03       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.