Literature DB >> 29719434

Measuring patient-reported outcomes to improve cancer care in Canada: an analysis of provincial survey data.

K Tran1, S Zomer1, J Chadder1, C Earle1,2, S Fung1, J Liu1, C Louzado1, R Rahal1, R Shaw Moxam1, E Green1.   

Abstract

Patient-reported outcomes measures (proms) are an important component of the shift from disease-centred to person-centred care. In oncology, proms describe the effects of cancer and its treatment from the patient perspective and ideally enable patients to communicate to their providers the physical symptoms and psychosocial concerns that are most relevant to them. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (esas-r) is a commonly used and validated tool in Canada to assess symptoms related to cancer. Here, we describe the extent to which patient-reported outcome programs have been implemented in Canada and the severity of symptoms causing distress for patients with cancer. As of April 2017, 8 of 10 provinces had implemented the esas-r to assess patient-reported outcomes. Data capture methods, the proportion of cancer treatment sites that have implemented the esas-r, and the time and frequency of screening vary from province to province. From October 2016 to March 2017 in the 8 reporting provinces, 88.0% of cancer patients were screened for symptoms. Of patients who reported having symptoms, 44.3% reported depression, with 15.5% reporting moderate-to-high levels; 50.0% reported pain, with 18.6% reporting moderate-to-high levels; 56.2% reported anxiety, with 20.4% reporting moderate-to-high levels; and 75.1% reported fatigue, with 34.4% reporting moderate-to-high levels. There are some notable areas in which the implementation of proms could be improved in Canada. Findings point to a need to increase the number of cancer treatment sites that screen all patients for symptoms; to standardize when and how frequently patients are screened across the country; to screen patients for symptoms during all phases of their cancer journey, not just during treatment; and to assess whether giving cancer care providers real-time patient-reported outcomes data has led to appropriate interventions that reduce the symptom burden and improve patient outcomes. Continued measurement and reporting at the system level will allow for a better understanding of progress in proms activity over time and of the areas in which targeted quality improvement efforts could ensure that patient symptoms and concerns are being addressed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Patient-reported outcomes; treatment

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29719434      PMCID: PMC5927789          DOI: 10.3747/co.25.3995

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Oncol        ISSN: 1198-0052            Impact factor:   3.677


  9 in total

1.  Overall Survival Results of a Trial Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes for Symptom Monitoring During Routine Cancer Treatment.

Authors:  Ethan Basch; Allison M Deal; Amylou C Dueck; Howard I Scher; Mark G Kris; Clifford Hudis; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Population-based standardized symptom screening: Cancer Care Ontario's Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and performance status initiatives.

Authors:  José Pereira; Esther Green; Sean Molloy; Deborah Dudgeon; Doris Howell; Monika K Krzyzanowska; Wenonah Mahase; Reena Tabing; Sara Urowitz; Laura Macdougall
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 3.840

3.  A multicenter study comparing two numerical versions of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System in palliative care patients.

Authors:  Sharon M Watanabe; Cheryl Nekolaichuk; Crystal Beaumont; Laureen Johnson; Jeff Myers; Florian Strasser
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 3.612

Review 4.  What is the value of the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures toward improvement of patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes in cancer care? A systematic review of controlled trials.

Authors:  Grigorios Kotronoulas; Nora Kearney; Roma Maguire; Alison Harrow; David Di Domenico; Suzanne Croy; Stephen MacGillivray
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-04-07       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 5.  Patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer clinical practice: a scoping review of use, impact on health outcomes, and implementation factors.

Authors:  D Howell; S Molloy; K Wilkinson; E Green; K Orchard; K Wang; J Liberty
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 32.976

6.  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

Review 7.  Capture, transfer, and feedback of patient-centered outcomes data in palliative care populations: does it make a difference? A systematic review.

Authors:  Simon Noah Etkind; Barbara A Daveson; Wingfai Kwok; Jana Witt; Claudia Bausewein; Irene J Higginson; Fliss E M Murtagh
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 3.612

8.  Development and validation of a psychosocial screening instrument for cancer.

Authors:  Wolfgang Linden; Dahyun Yi; Maria Cristina Barroetavena; Regina MacKenzie; Richard Doll
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2005-09-07       Impact factor: 3.186

Review 9.  A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting.

Authors:  Jack Chen; Lixin Ou; Stephanie J Hollis
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-06-11       Impact factor: 2.655

  9 in total
  6 in total

1.  Frequency, Timing, and Predictors of Palliative Care Consultation in Patients with Advanced Cancer at a Tertiary Cancer Center: Secondary Analysis of Routinely Collected Health Data.

Authors:  Sharon M Watanabe; Viane Faily; Asifa Mawani; Ann Huot; Yoko Tarumi; Alexei Potapov; Konrad Fassbender; Alysa Fairchild; Anil A Joy; Karen M King; Wilson Roa; Christopher P Venner; Vickie E Baracos
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2020-06-09

Review 2.  Patient reported outcomes in oncology: changing perspectives-a systematic review.

Authors:  Augusta Silveira; Teresa Sequeira; Joaquim Gonçalves; Pedro Lopes Ferreira
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 3.077

3.  Challenges in virtual collection of patient-reported data: a prospective cohort study conducted in COVID-19 era.

Authors:  Karineh Kazazian; Jessica Bogach; Wendy Johnston; Deanna Ng; Carol J Swallow
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2022-06-07       Impact factor: 3.359

4.  A Prospective Outcomes Pilot Evaluation of Inspire Now: A Program for People with Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Ellen Conte; Mark Legacy; Athanasios Psihogios; Anne Pitman; Andrea Redway; Jill Hamer-Wilson; Dugald Seely
Journal:  Integr Cancer Ther       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.279

Review 5.  Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on delivery of and models for supportive and palliative care for oncology patients.

Authors:  Karineh Kazazian; Deanna Ng; Carol J Swallow
Journal:  Curr Opin Support Palliat Care       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 2.265

6.  Patient-reported outcome measures obtained via E-Health tools ease the assessment burden and encourage patient participation in cancer care (PaCC Study).

Authors:  Nicole Erickson; T Schinkoethe; C Eckhardt; L Storck; A Joos; L Liu; P E Ballmer; F Mumm; T Fey; V Heinemann
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 3.603

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.