دورية أكاديمية

A prospective, randomized trial of patient-reported outcome measures to drive management decisions in hematology and oncology

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: A prospective, randomized trial of patient-reported outcome measures to drive management decisions in hematology and oncology
المؤلفون: Rahma Warsame, Joselle Cook, Briant Fruth, Joleen Hubbard, Katrina Croghan, Katharine A.R. Price, Aminah Jatoi, Shaji Kumar, Carrie Thompson, Jan Buckner, Angela Dispenzieri, Jeff Sloan, Amylou C. Dueck
المصدر: Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, Vol 29, Iss , Pp 100964- (2022)
بيانات النشر: Elsevier, 2022.
سنة النشر: 2022
المجموعة: LCC:Medicine (General)
مصطلحات موضوعية: Quality of life, Patient-reported outcomes, Health care delivery, Medicine (General), R5-920
الوصف: Background: Clinicians have limited time during patient encounters which can result in patients' concerns not being addressed. This study's objective was to test whether an electronic patient-reported outcome quality of life tool (PROQOL) in which patients identify their primary concern during clinic visits improves cancer patient quality of life (QOL). Patients and methods: This single center non-blinded prospective clinical trial randomized patients (2:1) to PROQOL versus usual care (UC). Two patient cohorts were enrolled: those with hematologic malignancies (multiple myeloma [MM] or light chain amyloidosis [AL]) and solid tumors (head and neck [H/N] or gynecologic [GYN] malignancies). Primary endpoint was patient-reported QOL at 12 months measured by a single-item Linear Analog Self-Assessment. Value to patients and impact on clinician workflow was measured using a “was it worth it” survey. The study was powered to detect a 0.5 standard deviation difference between groups. Results: Overall 383 patients were enrolled, 171 with MM, 62 AL, 113 GYN, and 37 H/N between July 2016 and April 2018, with 12-month follow-up. There were 171 (44.6%) male patients and median age was 62 years (range 31–87). The most often selected concern was physical health (30.9%), and second was cancer diagnosis and treatment (29.1%). Mean QOL was 7.12 for PROQOL and 6.98 for UC (0–10 scale) at 12 months, with no between-group difference overall (p = 0.56) or within hematologic or solid tumor cohorts, respectively. Among patients, 74% thought the PROQOL tool was worthwhile, 86% would choose PROQOL again, and 81% would recommend it to others. Among clinicians, 95% responded that PROQOL was worthwhile and did not think that PROQOL negatively impacted their workflow. Conclusions: Although we did not demonstrate a QOL difference between PROQOL and UC groups; the PROQOL tool held considerable value in identifying patients' main concerns over time and was worthwhile for patients and clinicians.
نوع الوثيقة: article
وصف الملف: electronic resource
اللغة: English
تدمد: 2451-8654
Relation: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451865422000813; https://doaj.org/toc/2451-8654
DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100964
URL الوصول: https://doaj.org/article/df27729c8b6f4826bb928ec671a83019
رقم الأكسشن: edsdoj.f27729c8b6f4826bb928ec671a83019
قاعدة البيانات: Directory of Open Access Journals
الوصف
تدمد:24518654
DOI:10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100964