Thomas M Atkinson1, Carolyn E Schwartz2, Leah Goldstein3, Iliana Garcia4, Daniel F Storfer3, Yuelin Li3, Jie Zhang5, Bernard H Bochner3, Bruce D Rapkin4. 1. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: atkinsot@mskcc.org. 2. DeltaQuest Foundation, Inc., Concord, MA, USA; Departments of Medicine and Orthopaedic Surgery, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 4. Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA. 5. DeltaQuest Foundation, Inc., Concord, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient response burden is often raised as a human subject concern in consideration of the length or complexity of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used in oncology. OBJECTIVES: To quantify patient response burden and identify its predictive factors. METHODS: Data were collected presurgically during a prospective trial that used a comprehensive symptom and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) PRO assessment. A subset of patients also completed HRQOL interviews. Response burden was captured using an internally developed six-item instrument. Demographic and clinical characteristics as well as HRQOL scores were examined as potential predictors using hierarchical regression. Response burden was used to predict participant dropout at the first follow-up interval. RESULTS: A total of 275 patients (mean age 67.5 years; 23.6% female) completed surveys (n = 126) or surveys in addition to interviews (n = 149). Patients experienced low response burden (mean 12.19 ± 11.65). Repetitive questions were identified by 60 patients (21.8%), whereas 31.6% indicated that additional information should be gathered; 35 patients (12.7%) identified repetitive questions and expressed a desire for additional items. Low self-reported cognitive function was a significant predictor of higher response burden (β = -0.20; t(270) = -3.38; P = 0.01; model-adjusted R2 = 0.04). Response burden was not a significant predictor of study dropout. CONCLUSIONS: Despite completing a large battery of PRO measures and interviews, patients reported minimal response burden, with nearly one-third expressing that more questions should have been asked. Patients with lower cognitive function are more likely to report higher response burden when completing PRO measures. Further examination of patient characteristics related to response burden may reveal useful pathways for tailoring patient-centered interventions.
BACKGROUND:Patient response burden is often raised as a human subject concern in consideration of the length or complexity of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used in oncology. OBJECTIVES: To quantify patient response burden and identify its predictive factors. METHODS: Data were collected presurgically during a prospective trial that used a comprehensive symptom and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) PRO assessment. A subset of patients also completed HRQOL interviews. Response burden was captured using an internally developed six-item instrument. Demographic and clinical characteristics as well as HRQOL scores were examined as potential predictors using hierarchical regression. Response burden was used to predict participant dropout at the first follow-up interval. RESULTS: A total of 275 patients (mean age 67.5 years; 23.6% female) completed surveys (n = 126) or surveys in addition to interviews (n = 149). Patients experienced low response burden (mean 12.19 ± 11.65). Repetitive questions were identified by 60 patients (21.8%), whereas 31.6% indicated that additional information should be gathered; 35 patients (12.7%) identified repetitive questions and expressed a desire for additional items. Low self-reported cognitive function was a significant predictor of higher response burden (β = -0.20; t(270) = -3.38; P = 0.01; model-adjusted R2 = 0.04). Response burden was not a significant predictor of study dropout. CONCLUSIONS: Despite completing a large battery of PRO measures and interviews, patients reported minimal response burden, with nearly one-third expressing that more questions should have been asked. Patients with lower cognitive function are more likely to report higher response burden when completing PRO measures. Further examination of patient characteristics related to response burden may reveal useful pathways for tailoring patient-centered interventions.
Authors: Larissa K Temple; Jennifer Bacik; Salvatore G Savatta; Lester Gottesman; Philip B Paty; Martin R Weiser; José G Guillem; Bruce D Minsky; Michelle Kalman; Howard T Thaler; Deborah Schrag; W Douglas Wong Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Christopher B Anderson; Bruce Rapkin; Brieyona C Reaves; Arony J Sun; Bradley Morganstern; Guido Dalbagni; Machele Donat; Harry W Herr; Vincent P Laudone; Bernard H Bochner Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Matthew B Clements; Thomas M Atkinson; Guido M Dalbagni; Yuelin Li; Andrew J Vickers; Harry W Herr; S Machele Donat; Jaspreet S Sandhu; Daniel S Sjoberg; Amy L Tin; Bruce D Rapkin; Bernard H Bochner Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2021-10-08 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Zachary W Veitch; Daniel Shepshelovich; Christina Gallagher; Lisa Wang; Albiruni R Abdul Razak; Anna Spreafico; Philippe L Bedard; Lillian L Siu; Lori Minasian; Aaron R Hansen Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 13.506