Dataset Information

Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Breast Surgical Oncology: Advancing Toward Value-Based Care.

ABSTRACT: Value in health care is defined as the health outcome achieved per unit of cost. For health care systems, improving value means achieving better outcomes at lower costs. Improving outcomes, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs), as well as more established metrics such as mortality and complication rates, ensures high-quality care. This is particularly true in breast cancer surgery, where survival and recurrence rates are comparable across different surgical approaches. Outcomes reflecting survivorship quality may therefore better inform decision making regarding surgical approaches. PROs can be assessed using validated instruments known as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). They are obtained directly from patients reflecting their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Ongoing initiatives strive to define PROMs that accurately reflect HRQOL and demonstrate value, with the goal of establishing benchmarks for quality of care. Clinicians caring for patients with breast cancer are well positioned to be involved in defining meaningful measures of value-based breast cancer care. This article reviews value-based breast cancer care in the context of locoregional therapy, with attention paid to the work done by the International Consortium of Health Outcome Measures in which a "standard set" of value-based patient-centered outcomes for breast cancer for international use is defined. In addition, an overview is provided of relevant PROMs and previously reported scores. Recommendations and future challenges for implementation of routine collection of PROs are also discussed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Opportunity exists to act as early adopters of the routine collection of longitudinal patient-reported outcome data for breast cancer, allowing transition of current care to value-based cancer care.

SUBMITTER: Lagendijk M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7216450 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Breast Surgical Oncology: Advancing Toward Value-Based Care.

Lagendijk Mirelle M Mittendorf Elizabeth E King Tari A TA Gibbons Christopher C Pusic Andrea A Dominici Laura S LS

The oncologist 20191217 5

Value in health care is defined as the health outcome achieved per unit of cost. For health care systems, improving value means achieving better outcomes at lower costs. Improving outcomes, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs), as well as more established metrics such as mortality and complication rates, ensures high-quality care. This is particularly true in breast cancer surgery, where survival and recurrence rates are comparable across different surgical approaches. Outcomes reflecting ...[more]

PMID: 31848315

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mobile health (mHealth) technologies are increasingly used in various medical fields. However, the potential of mHealth to improve patient care in radiotherapy by acquiring electronic patient reported outcome measures (ePROMs) during treatment has been poorly studied so far. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to develop and implement a novel Web app (PROMetheus) for patients undergoing radiotherapy. Herein, we have reported our experience with a focus on feasibility, patient acceptance, and a correlation of ePROMs with the clinical course of the patients. METHODS:In the period between January and June 2018, 21 patients used PROMetheus to score side effects, symptoms, and quality of life-related parameters during and after their treatment. Items of the Patient Reported Outcome version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) were chosen based on the primary site of disease, 27 items for head and neck tumors, 21 items for thoracic tumors, and 24 items for pelvic tumors. RESULTS:In total, 17 out of the 21 patients (81%) regularly submitted ePROMs and more than 2500 data points were acquired. An average of 5.2, 3.5, and 3.3 min was required to complete the head and neck, thorax, and pelvis questionnaires, respectively. ePROMS were able to detect the occurrence of both expected and unexpected side effects during the treatment. In addition, a gradual increase in the severity of side effects over the course the treatment and their remission afterward could be observed with ePROMs. In total, 9 out of the 17 patients (53%), mostly those with head and neck and thoracic cancers, reported PRO-CTCAE grade III or IV fatigue with severe impairments of activities of daily life. CONCLUSIONS:This study shows the successful implementation of an ePROM system and a high patient acceptance. ePROMs have a great potential to improve patient care in radiotherapy by providing a comprehensive documentation of symptoms and side effects, especially of ones that are otherwise underreported.

Project description:BackgroundKnee replacement is a very effective and indispensable treatment option for end-stage knee arthritis, and the number of cases has been increasing worldwide. A replaced knee joint without patient joint awareness is thought to be the ultimate goal of artificial knees. Joint awareness reportedly correlates with patient satisfaction. Although numbness around a replaced knee is a minor but common problem, its effect on postoperative outcome is controversial. Joint awareness also is sensitive to subtle abnormalities of the joint, so it must be negatively affected by numbness. Although numbness is minor, it cannot be ignored to further improve knee replacement outcomes. This study investigated the relationship between patient-reported numbness and other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including joint awareness, and kneeling. We developed a numbness score based on a 5-point Likert scale on frequency of numbness, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.76 and higher scores indicating less numbness.MethodsThe numbness score, New Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12), and other clinical and radiological data from 311 patients (394 primary knee replacements) were analyzed. Kneeling ability was evaluated by using kneeling-specific items in the KSS (KSS-Kneeling).ResultsNo numbness was found in 170 knees (43.1%), and some degree of numbness was found in the remaining 224 knees (56.9%). The numbness score showed weak-to-moderate correlations with KSS-Symptoms (r = 0.44), KSS-Satisfaction (r = 0.41), KSS-Activities (r = 0.29), and all KOOS subscales (r = 0.23-0.44), and FJS-12 (r = 0.42). Multiple regression analyses suggested that midline incision positively affected the numbness score over the anteromedial incision (p = 0.04) and that a better numbness score (p = 0.001), male sex (p < 0.0001), and better postoperative knee flexion angle (0.04) positively affected kneeling.ConclusionsThe numbness score positively correlated with PROMs and positively affected kneeling. Knee replacements performed via an anteromedial incision may be at higher risk for numbness.

Project description:BackgroundClinicians 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 methodsThis 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.ResultsOverall 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.ConclusionsAlthough 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.

Dataset Information

Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Breast Surgical Oncology: Advancing Toward Value-Based Care.

Publications

Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Breast Surgical Oncology: Advancing Toward Value-Based Care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets