Dataset Information

Patient-reported pain severity and health-related quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma in real world clinical practice.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The association between patient self-reported pain severity and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) is poorly understood.

Aims

This real-world study of symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM) patients sought to determine how pain severity from a single question asked during routine clinical consultation was associated with HRQoL.

Methods and results

Point-in-time data on HRQoL of 330 patients with MM (median age 70 years) receiving anti-myeloma therapy in Germany and Italy from November 2017 through February 2018 were analyzed. HRQoL was assessed using validated questionnaires (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI], European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire -C30 and -MY20). Physical pain severity was assessed during clinical consultation by a single question, asking patients to describe their pain as "no pain," "mild," "moderate," or "severe." Associations between patient-reported pain severity and HRQoL scores were assessed by analysis of variance or χ² tests. Ninety-six of the 330 patients (29.1%) reported moderate to severe pain. Increase in pain severity, from "no" to "severe" pain, was associated with significantly decreased overall HRQoL (mean score 70.2 to 33.3); significant decreases in levels of physical (82.7 to 35.1), social (81.1 to 44.4), emotional (78.1 to 48.3), and role functioning (79.5 to 38.9); and increased levels of WPAI usual activity impairment (35.4 to 71.4), and fatigue burden (26.0 to 68.9) (all p < .001).

Conclusion

Higher pain severity, based on a single self-report question, was associated with poorer HRQoL in patients with MM, thereby supporting the clinical relevance of directly asking patients to self-evaluate their pain severity.

SUBMITTER: Ludwig H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8789609 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLittle research has focused on implementation of electronic Patient Reported Outcomes (e-PROs) for meaningful use in patient management in 'real-world' oncology practices. Our quality improvement collaborative used multi-faceted implementation strategies including audit and feedback, disease-site champions and practice coaching, core training of clinicians in a person-centered clinical method for use of e-PROs in shared treatment planning and patient activation, ongoing educational outreach and shared collaborative learnings to facilitate integration of e-PROs data in multi-sites in Ontario and Quebec, Canada for personalized management of generic and targeted symptoms of pain, fatigue, and emotional distress (depression, anxiety).Patients and methodsWe used a mixed-methods (qualitative and quantitative data) program evaluation design to assess process/implementation outcomes including e-PROs completion rates, acceptability/use from the perspective of patients/clinicians, and patient experience (surveys, qualitative focus groups). We secondarily explored impact on symptom severity, patient activation and healthcare utilization (Ontario sites only) comparing a pre/post population cohort not exposed/exposed to our implementation intervention using Mann Whitney U tests. We hypothesized that the iPEHOC intervention would result in a reduction in symptom severity, healthcare utilization, and higher patient activation. We also identified key implementation strategies that sites perceived as most valuable to uptake and any barriers.ResultsOver 6000 patients completed e-PROs, with sites reaching 51%-95% population completion rates depending on initial readiness. e-PROs were acceptable to patients for communicating symptoms (76%) and by clinicians for treatment planning (80%). Patient experience was better than the provincial average. Compared to the pre-population, we observed a significant reduction in levels of anxiety (p = 0.008), higher levels of patient activation (p = 0.045), and reduced hospitalization rates (12.3% not exposed vs 10.1% exposed, p = 0.034). A pre/post population trend towards significance for reduced emergency department visit rates (14.8% not exposed vs 12.8% exposed, p = 0.081) was also noted.ConclusionThis large-scale pragmatic quality improvement project demonstrates the impact of implementation strategies and a collaborative improvement approach on acceptability of using PROs in clinical practice and their potential for reducing anxiety and healthcare utilization; and improving patient experience and patient activation when implemented in 'real-world' multi-site oncology practices.