Literature DB >> 29110842

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of lung cancer: A systematic review.

Youssef Ben Bouazza1, Ibrahim Chiairi2, Ouiam El Kharbouchi3, Lesley De Backer4, Greetje Vanhoutte4, Annelies Janssens5, Jan P Van Meerbeeck6.   

Abstract

Lung cancer is often associated with a poor quality of life, as reflected by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The aim of this paper is to describe and compare the PROMs that are available. In this manuscript, we review the impact of PROMs on the management of lung cancer. Quality of the study and risk of bias were assessed using the appraisal tools recommended by the Dutch Cochrane Center. Out of 51 studies included in this review, ten instruments were identified and categorized as either generic, cancer- or lung cancer-specific. PROMs are primarily applied in scientific research to compare the therapy outcomes and in drug development to support labeling claims. The interest for the routine use of PROMs in daily practice is growing, which has positive effects on the communication with the patient, mutual decision making and the monitoring and managing of the patient. Besides that, PROMs have an independent prognostic value for survival in lung cancer and economic evaluations can be conducted using their results. Electronic platforms simplify the implementation of PROMs in the daily clinic. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and its lung cancer-specific module QLQ-LC13 are the most frequently used instruments in lung cancer patients. PROMs have the potential to improve the quality of care with a proper implementation in the routine practice. PROMS are needed to value and understand the experience of the patient.
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Health-related quality of life; Lung cancer; Patient-reported outcome measures; Patient-reported outcomes; Quality improvement; Questionnaires

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29110842     DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2017.09.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lung Cancer        ISSN: 0169-5002            Impact factor:   5.705


  32 in total

1.  The distress thermometer as a prognostic tool for one-year survival among patients with lung cancer.

Authors:  O P Geerse; D Brandenbarg; H A M Kerstjens; A J Berendsen; S F A Duijts; H Burger; G A Holtman; J E H M Hoekstra-Weebers; T J N Hiltermann
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2019-02-10       Impact factor: 5.705

2.  Patients reported outcomes in thoracic surgery.

Authors:  Cecilia Pompili; Kate Absolom; Galina Velikova; Leah Backhus
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Functional impairment, symptom severity, and overall quality of life in patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer in six European countries: baseline findings from the ACTION study.

Authors:  Mariëtte N Verkissen; Aline De Vleminck; Mogens Groenvold; Lea J Jabbarian; Francesco Bulli; Wilfried Cools; Johannes J M van Delden; Urška Lunder; Guido Miccinesi; Sheila A Payne; Kristian Pollock; Judith A C Rietjens; Luc Deliens
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2021-03-19       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Lung cancer and family-centered concerns.

Authors:  Josephine Feliciano; Alexander Chang; Deepti Venkatraman; Samara Brooks; Ciara Zagaja; David Ettinger; Christine Hann; Jarushka Naidoo; Ranh Voong; Russell Hales; Michelle Turner; Valerie Peterson; Joann Bodurtha
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Stepping into the real world: a mixed-methods evaluation of the implementation of electronic patient reported outcomes in routine lung cancer care.

Authors:  Afaf Girgis; Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele; Orlando Rincones; Shalini K Vinod; Sandra Avery; Joseph Descallar; Allan 'Ben' Smith; Belinda Arnold; Anthony Arnold; Victoria Bray; Ivana Durcinoska; Nicole M Rankin; Geoff P Delaney
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2022-06-20

6.  Prognostic value of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in adults with non-small cell Lung Cancer: a scoping review.

Authors:  Kuan Liao; Tianxiao Wang; Jake Coomber-Moore; David C Wong; Fabio Gomes; Corinne Faivre-Finn; Matthew Sperrin; Janelle Yorke; Sabine N van der Veer
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-10-19       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 7.  The Digital Outcome Measure.

Authors:  Adam B Cohen; Simon C Mathews
Journal:  Digit Biomark       Date:  2018-09-21

8.  Post-operative hypercoagulable whole blood profiles in patients undergoing open thoracotomy vs video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Luca Spiezia; Marco Cuzzolin; Hernandez Elssy; Guido Di Gregorio; Elena Campello; Federico Rea; Andrea Zuin; Paolo Simioni
Journal:  Blood Transfus       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 3.443

9.  Factors associated with early postoperative survey completion in orthopaedic surgery patients.

Authors:  Patrick Mj Sajak; Ali Aneizi; Rohan Gopinath; Vidushan Nadarajah; Cameran Burt; Dominic Ventimiglia; Ngozi Akabudike; Min Zhan; R Frank Henn
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-07-19

10.  The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a descriptive literature survey.

Authors:  Youssef Ben Bouazza; Jan P Van Meerbeeck
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2018-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.