Miha Sok1,2, Miha Zavrl3, Boris Greif3, Matevž Srpčič3. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Zaloška cesta 7, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia. miha.sok@mf.uni-lj.si. 2. Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Vrazov trg 2, Ljubljana, Slovenia. miha.sok@mf.uni-lj.si. 3. Department of Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Zaloška cesta 7, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Performance status is an important factor in determining quality of life, the choice of treatment, and prognostic tool in patients. All scoring systems currently in use measure the patient's performance subjectively. A new method of objective assessment of performance ECOG/WHO grades 2 and 3 was constructed and tested. METHODS: A performance meter-an adapted USB data logger with a mercury tilt switch-was constructed. The device was tested in a feasibility study on 33 residents of a retirement home. Parallel to the objective assessment, each resident gave their own estimate of their performance, and each resident was in turn assessed by the nursing staff. RESULTS: With the performance meter, 4 residents (12%) were assessed as PS ≥ 3 in comparison with 8 (24%) and 7 (21%) residents with an ECOG score ≥ 3 estimated by patients themselves and nursing staff respectively. CONCLUSION: Subjective scoring-estimated by patients themselves and by nursing staff-showed underestimation of patients' performance. In 12% of patients, a better performance score was observed with objective measurement in comparison with subjective assessment. Performance meter could be a useful tool for health care professionals for type of care decisions.
PURPOSE: Performance status is an important factor in determining quality of life, the choice of treatment, and prognostic tool in patients. All scoring systems currently in use measure the patient's performance subjectively. A new method of objective assessment of performance ECOG/WHO grades 2 and 3 was constructed and tested. METHODS: A performance meter-an adapted USB data logger with a mercury tilt switch-was constructed. The device was tested in a feasibility study on 33 residents of a retirement home. Parallel to the objective assessment, each resident gave their own estimate of their performance, and each resident was in turn assessed by the nursing staff. RESULTS: With the performance meter, 4 residents (12%) were assessed as PS ≥ 3 in comparison with 8 (24%) and 7 (21%) residents with an ECOG score ≥ 3 estimated by patients themselves and nursing staff respectively. CONCLUSION: Subjective scoring-estimated by patients themselves and by nursing staff-showed underestimation of patients' performance. In 12% of patients, a better performance score was observed with objective measurement in comparison with subjective assessment. Performance meter could be a useful tool for health care professionals for type of care decisions.
Entities:
Keywords:
ECOG score; Objective score; Performance meter; Performance status
Authors: Marco Maltoni; Augusto Caraceni; Cinzia Brunelli; Bert Broeckaert; Nicholas Christakis; Steffen Eychmueller; Paul Glare; Maria Nabal; Antonio Viganò; Philip Larkin; Franco De Conno; Geoffrey Hanks; Stein Kaasa Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Richard J E Skipworth; Guro B Stene; Max Dahele; Paul O Hendry; Alexandra C Small; David Blum; Stein Kaasa; Peter Trottenberg; Lukas Radbruch; Florian Strasser; Tom Preston; Kenneth C H Fearon; Jorunn L Helbostad Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2011-07-05 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: Daniel J Sargent; Claus Henning Köhne; Hanna Kelly Sanoff; Brian M Bot; Matthew T Seymour; Aimery de Gramont; Ranier Porschen; Leonard B Saltz; Philippe Rougier; Christopher Tournigand; Jean-Yves Douillard; Richard J Stephens; Axel Grothey; Richard M Goldberg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-03-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Amy P Abernethy; Tania Shelby-James; Belinda S Fazekas; David Woods; David C Currow Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2005-11-12 Impact factor: 3.234
Authors: Maria J Monroy-Iglesias; Sonpreet Rai; Francesco A Mistretta; Graham Roberts; Harvey Dickinson; Beth Russell; Charlotte Moss; Rita De Berardinis; Matteo Ferro; Gennaro Musi; Christian Brown; Rajesh Nair; Ramesh Thurairaja; Archana Fernando; Paul Cathcart; Azhar Khan; Prokar Dasgupta; Sachin Malde; Marios Hadijpavlou; Saoirse Dolly; Kate Haire; Marta Tagliabue; Ottavio de Cobelli; Ben Challacombe; Mieke Van Hemelrijck Journal: BJUI Compass Date: 2022-01-27
Authors: Dinesh Pal Mudaranthakam; Byron Gajewski; Hope Krebill; James Coulter; Michelle Springer; Elizabeth Calhoun; Dorothy Hughes; Matthew Mayo; Gary Doolittle Journal: JMIR Cancer Date: 2022-04-21
Authors: Costantine Albany; Zeeshan Fazal; Ratnakar Singh; Emmanuel Bikorimana; Nabil Adra; Nasser H Hanna; Lawrence H Einhorn; Susan M Perkins; George E Sandusky; Brock C Christensen; Harold Keer; Fang Fang; Kenneth P Nephew; Michael J Spinella Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Maria J Monroy-Iglesias; Marta Tagliabue; Harvey Dickinson; Graham Roberts; Rita De Berardinis; Beth Russell; Charlotte Moss; Sophie Irwin; Jonathon Olsburgh; Ivana Maria Francesca Cocco; Alexis Schizas; Sarah McCrindle; Rahul Nath; Aina Brunet; Ricard Simo; Chrysostomos Tornari; Parthi Srinivasan; Andreas Prachalias; Andrew Davies; Jenny Geh; Stephanie Fraser; Tom Routledge; RuJun Ma; Ella Doerge; Ben Challacombe; Raj Nair; Marios Hadjipavlou; Rosaria Scarpinata; Paolo Sorelli; Saoirse Dolly; Francesco Alessandro Mistretta; Gennaro Musi; Monica Casiraghi; Alessia Aloisi; Andrea Dell'Acqua; Donatella Scaglione; Stefania Zanoni; Daniele Rampazio Da Silva; Daniela Brambilla; Raffaella Bertolotti; Giulia Peruzzotti; Angelo Maggioni; Ottavio de Cobelli; Lorenzo Spaggiari; Mohssen Ansarin; Fabrizio Mastrilli; Sara Gandini; Urvashi Jain; Hisham Hamed; Kate Haire; Mieke Van Hemelrijck Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-03-30 Impact factor: 6.639