Dataset Information

Physician and patient concordance in reporting of appropriateness and prioritization for cataract surgery.

ABSTRACT:

Background/aims

Determine the association between physician-deemed and patient-reported appropriateness and prioritization for cataract surgery.

Methods

Prospective cohort study of 471 patients of 7 ophthalmologists referred for cataract surgery. Ophthalmologists rated patients for cataract surgery appropriateness and prioritization using a visual analogue scale of 0-10 preoperatively. All patients completed the eCAPS Quality of Life (QoL), while 313 completed the Catquest-9SF and EQ-5D questionnaires. Regression analyses were applied to determine demographic, clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) associated with appropriateness and prioritization.

Results

Two clinical factors (study eye and fellow eye best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA)), 2 eCAPS (night driving difficulty, ability to take care of local errands), and 2 Catquest-9SF PROMs (recognizing faces, seeing to walk on uneven ground) were associated with appropriateness. In multivariable regression, the rating physician, 2 clinical criteria (study eye BCVA, anticipated postoperative BCVA) and 1 eCAPS QoL (night driving difficulty) were associated with appropriateness. Prioritization was associated with low income, 8 clinical criteria, 9 eCAPS, 5 Catquest-9SF, and 1 EQ-5D PROMs. In multivariable regression, 1 clinical criterion (study eye BCVA), 2 eCAPS QoL (night driving difficulty, ability to take care of local errands), and 2 Catquest-9SF PROMs (seeing prices, seeing to walk on uneven ground) were significantly associated.

Conclusions

The eCAPS and Catquest-9SF questionnaires show some concordance with physician-deemed appropriateness, and more with prioritization. Binary conversions of PROM scales provide similar modelling, with minimal loss of explanatory power. As physician-deemed appropriateness and prioritization do not completely capture the patient perspective, PROMs may have a role in cataract surgery decision-making frameworks.

SUBMITTER: Schlenker MB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8232411 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:Accurately tracking health-related quality-of-life after radical prostatectomy is critical to counseling patients and improving technique. Physicians consistently overestimate functional recovery. We measured concordance between surgeon-assessed and patient-reported outcomes and evaluated a novel method to provide feedback to surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Men treated with radical prostatectomy self-completed the International Index of Erectile Function-6 questionnaire at each postoperative visit. Separately, physicians graded sexual function on a 5-point scale. International Index of Erectile Function -6 score<22 and grade ?3 defined patient-reported and physician-assessed erectile dysfunction (ED), respectively. Feedback on concordance was given to physicians starting in May 2013 with the implementation of the Amplio feedback system. Chi-square tests were used to assess agreement proportions and linear regression to evaluate changes in agreement after implementation. RESULTS:From 2009 to 2015, 3,053 men completed at least 1 postprostatectomy questionnaire and had a concurrent independent physician-reported outcome. Prior to implementation of feedback in 2013, patients and physicians were consistent as to ED 83% of the time; in 10% of cases, physicians overestimated function; in 7% of cases, physicians, but not patients reported ED. Agreement increased after implementation of feedback but this was not statistically significant, likely owing to a ceiling effect. Supporting this hypothesis, increase in agreement postfeedback was greater during late follow-up (?12mo), where baseline agreement was lower compared to earlier follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:Agreement was higher than expected at baseline; implementation of feedback regarding discrepancies between patient-reported and physician-assessed outcomes did not further improve agreement significantly. Our observed high rate of agreement may be partly attributed to our institutional practice of systematically capturing patient-reported outcomes as part of normal clinical care.

Project description:Importance:The treatment plans of patients with cancer involve multiple modalities that oncologists need to explain to patients. One such modality is chemotherapy, in which information about the goals, duration, and expected complications of therapy are considered fundamental to achieving optimal patient understanding. Therefore, effective communication between patients and their treating physicians is important to ensure patient adherence to treatment and achieve better outcomes. Objective:To investigate the concordance in the understanding of chemotherapy treatment plans between patients and their treating oncologists and to identify the potential factors associated with concordance. Design, Setting, and Participants:A cross-sectional study was conducted among adult patients (aged >18 years) with cancer who consented to receive chemotherapy between October 4, 2017, and November 8, 2018. The study also included the treating oncologists of patients receiving chemotherapy. An interview-based structured questionnaire was administered in both inpatient and outpatient settings at the Princess Noorah Oncology Center in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The demographic data of patients and physicians were obtained from the ARIA Oncology Information System, a chemotherapy-prescribing software database used at the center. Patients who had a personal history of cancer or were unwilling to be involved in the decision-making process were excluded. Data were analyzed from November 15 to December 20, 2018. Exposures:Patients' comprehension and concordance with their treating physicians regarding the aspects of the intended treatment plan. Main Outcomes and Measures:The main outcomes measured were the patient-physician concordance level in the understanding of treatment plans and the identification of patient-related and physician-related factors associated with the level of concordance. Results:A total of 151 adult patients (77 men [51.0%] and 74 women [49.0%]) were interviewed. Of those, 144 patients (75.5%) were younger than 60 years, and 52 patients (34.4%) had a college or advanced degree. A total of 20 treating oncologists were interviewed, of whom 14 (70.0%) were men and 6 (30.0%) were women. Arabic was the primary language of 19 oncologists (95.0%), and 19 oncologists (95.0%) had medical practice experience outside of Saudi Arabia. Only 20 patients (13.7%) had full concordance with their physicians regarding the aspects of their treatment plans. The remaining 131 patients (86.2%) had discordance with 1 or more aspect of their treatment plans. The most common aspect of discordance was the planned duration of the chemotherapy regimen, with 104 patients (68.4%) having full discordance. Full patient-physician concordance was more likely among patients with college or advanced degrees (?21?=?17.73; P?<?.001) and patients with a family history of cancer (?21?=?15.88; P?<?.001). In addition, older physicians (>40 years) compared with younger physicians (aged 30-40 years) were more likely to achieve higher rates of full patient-physician concordance, whereas older patients (>60 years) were associated with only partial concordance compared with patients younger than 60 years (?21?=?5.84; P?=?.008), with an AR of 2.7. Conclusions and Relevance:Most patients showed suboptimal understanding of aspects of their chemotherapy treatment plans. More effort and time should be dedicated to enhancing the understanding of chemotherapy plans among patients with lower educational levels. In addition, self-report surveys that evaluate patients' understanding of their chemotherapy treatment plans should be developed and added to the informed consent process to objectively assess how much a patient understands and to develop a stepwise patient education program that targets patients with the lowest levels of understanding.