Literature DB >> 29806212

The Association of Proxy Care Engagement with Proxy Reports of Patient Experience and Quality of Life.

Jessica K Roydhouse1, Roee Gutman2, Nancy L Keating3, Vincent Mor1, Ira B Wilson1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of proxy-specific covariates with proxy-reported patient cancer care experience, quality rating, and quality of life. DATA SOURCES/STUDY
SETTING: Secondary analysis of data from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study. STUDY
DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. The respondents were proxies for patients with incident colorectal or lung cancer. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
METHODS: Analyses used linear regression models and adjusted for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Outcomes included patients' experiences with medical care, nursing care, and care coordination, overall quality ratings, and physical and mental health, all scored on 0-100 scales (0 = worst, 100 = best). Independent variables included the proxy's relationship with the patient and engagement in patient care. PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: Of 1,011 proxies, most were the patient's spouse (50 percent) or child (36 percent). Although most proxies (66 percent) always attended medical visits, 3 percent reported never attending. After adjustment, on average children reported worse experiences and poorer quality care than spouses (4-9 points lower across outcomes). Proxies who never attended medical visits reported significantly worse medical care (-11 points, 95 percent CI = -18 to -3) and care coordination (-13 points, 95 percent CI = -20 to -6).
CONCLUSIONS: Collecting data on proxy engagement in care is warranted if proxy responses are used. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Caregiver; cancer; experience; proxy; quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29806212      PMCID: PMC6153170          DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.12980

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.402


  23 in total

1.  Evaluating the impact of non-response bias in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

Authors:  Karen L Schneider; Melissa A Clark; William Rakowski; Kate L Lapane
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2010-10-19       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Are family members suitable proxies for transitional care unit residents when collecting satisfaction information?

Authors:  Nicholas Castle
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2005-06-10       Impact factor: 2.038

3.  Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment.

Authors:  B Gandek; J E Ware; N K Aaronson; G Apolone; J B Bjorner; J E Brazier; M Bullinger; S Kaasa; A Leplege; L Prieto; M Sullivan
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Patient-reported experiences with hospitals: comparison of proxy and patient scores using propensity-score matching.

Authors:  Oyvind Bjertnaes
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 2.038

5.  How much do cancer-related symptoms contribute to health-related quality of life in lung and colorectal cancer patients? A report from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) Consortium.

Authors:  Kelly M Kenzik; Patricia A Ganz; Michelle Y Martin; Laura Petersen; Ron D Hays; Neeraj Arora; Maria Pisu
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 6.  Judging the quality of care at the end of life: can proxies provide reliable information?

Authors:  C J McPherson; J M Addington-Hall
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Patients' experiences with care for lung cancer and colorectal cancer: findings from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium.

Authors:  John Z Ayanian; Alan M Zaslavsky; Neeraj K Arora; Katherine L Kahn; Jennifer L Malin; Patricia A Ganz; Michelle van Ryn; Mark C Hornbrook; Catarina I Kiefe; Yulei He; Julie M Urmie; Jane C Weeks; David P Harrington
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-08-16       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Patients' expectations about effects of chemotherapy for advanced cancer.

Authors:  Jane C Weeks; Paul J Catalano; Angel Cronin; Matthew D Finkelman; Jennifer W Mack; Nancy L Keating; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Symptom prevalence in lung and colorectal cancer patients.

Authors:  Anne M Walling; Jane C Weeks; Katherine L Kahn; Diana Tisnado; Nancy L Keating; Sydney M Dy; Neeraj K Arora; Jennifer W Mack; Philip M Pantoja; Jennifer L Malin
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 3.612

10.  Proxy assessment of health-related quality of life in african american and white respondents with prostate cancer: perspective matters.

Authors:  A Simon Pickard; Hsiang-Wen Lin; Sara J Knight; Sara L Knight; Roohollah Sharifi; Zhigang Wu; Shih-Ying Hung; Whitney P Witt; Chih-Hung Chang; Charles L Bennett
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  SPIRIT-PRO Extension explanation and elaboration: guidelines for inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in protocols of clinical trials.

Authors:  Melanie Calvert; Madeleine King; Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber; Olalekan Aiyegbusi; Derek Kyte; Anita Slade; An-Wen Chan; E Basch; Jill Bell; Antonia Bennett; Vishal Bhatnagar; Jane Blazeby; Andrew Bottomley; Julia Brown; Michael Brundage; Lisa Campbell; Joseph C Cappelleri; Heather Draper; Amylou C Dueck; Carolyn Ells; Lori Frank; Robert M Golub; Ingolf Griebsch; Kirstie Haywood; Amanda Hunn; Bellinda King-Kallimanis; Laura Martin; Sandra Mitchell; Thomas Morel; Linda Nelson; Josephine Norquist; Daniel O'Connor; Michael Palmer; Donald Patrick; Gary Price; Antoine Regnault; Ameeta Retzer; Dennis Revicki; Jane Scott; Richard Stephens; Grace Turner; Antonia Valakas; Galina Velikova; Maria von Hildebrand; Anita Walker; Lari Wenzel
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Comparison of Patient and Proxy Assessment of Patient-Centeredness in the Care of Coronary Heart Disease: A Cross Sectional Survey Using the PACIC-S11.1.

Authors:  Vera Vennedey; Samia Peltzer; Arim Shukri; Hendrik Müller; Frank Jessen; Christian Albus; Stephanie Stock
Journal:  J Prim Care Community Health       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec

3.  Patient experiences with general practice in Norway: a comparison of immigrant groups and the majority population following a national survey.

Authors:  Marte Kjøllesdal; Thor Indseth; Hilde Hestad Iversen; Oyvind Bjertnaes
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  Patient-Proxy Agreement Regarding Health-Related Quality of Life in Survivors with Lymphoma: A Propensity-Score Matching Analysis.

Authors:  Richard Huan Xu; Dong Dong
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 6.639

5.  Factors associated with persistently high-cost health care utilization for musculoskeletal pain.

Authors:  Trevor A Lentz; Jeffrey S Harman; Nicole M Marlow; Jason M Beneciuk; Roger B Fillingim; Steven Z George
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.