Does the use of the revised Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PATrev) result in improved quality of life and reduced psychosocial risk in Canadian families with a child newly diagnosed with cancer?

2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Barrera ◽  
K. Hancock ◽  
A. Rokeach ◽  
E. Atenafu ◽  
D. Cataudella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Psychosocial Risk ◽  
Psychosocial Assessment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed

Identifying Psychosocial Risk Indicative of Subsequent Resource Use in Families of Newly Diagnosed Pediatric Oncology Patients

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (17) ◽  
pp. 3220-3225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne E. Kazak ◽  
M. Catherine Cant ◽  
Merritt M. Jensen ◽  
Mary McSherry ◽  
Mary T. Rourke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Psychosocial Risk ◽  
Psychosocial Assessment ◽  
Risk Level ◽  
Psychosocial Resources ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Family Risk ◽  
Cost Efficient

Purpose: The primary purpose of this prospective study was to identify the level of risk for psychosocial distress in families of children newly diagnosed with cancer. Additional study aims were to examine concordance among family and staff reports of psychosocial risk, changes in risk status over time, and to predict the use of psychosocial resources during the first months of treatment. Patients and Methods: Caregivers of 125 children newly diagnosed with cancer completed the Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT) at diagnosis (t1) and 3 to 6 months later (t2). Primary oncologists and nurses completed an analogous measure of perceived family psychosocial risk at t1 and t2. At t2, oncology social workers reported types and intensity of psychosocial interventions provided. Results: The PAT identified three subsets of families who presented with increasing levels of psychosocial risk at diagnosis. In general, there was moderate concordance among family, oncologist, and nurse reports of psychosocial risk. PAT scores at t1 predicted t2 PAT scores and psychosocial resource use at t2 beyond demographic or disease factors. Conclusion: A brief screening tool (PAT) is valuable in identifying psychosocial risk factors at diagnosis and is predictive of later use of psychosocial resources. As a next step in this research, the development of psychosocial interventions to match family risk level may be an effective and cost-efficient approach to working with families to address their concerns and promote short- and long-term adjustment.

scholarly journals Predictors of trajectories of epilepsy-specific quality of life among children newly diagnosed with epilepsy

2016 ◽  
Vol 57 ◽  
pp. 202-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachelle R. Ramsey ◽  
Kristin Loiselle ◽  
Joseph R. Rausch ◽  
Jordan Harrison ◽  
Avani C. Modi
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Newly Diagnosed

scholarly journals BOMET-QoL-10 questionnaire for breast cancer patients with bone metastasis: the prospective MABOMET GEICAM study

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Barnadas ◽  
◽  
M. Muñoz ◽  
M. Margelí ◽  
J. I. Chacón ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Health Status ◽  
Bone Metastasis ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Perceived Health ◽  
Perceived Health Status ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background Bone metastasis (BM) is the most common site of disease in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. BM impacts health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We tested prospectively the psychometric properties of the Bone Metastasis Quality of Life (BOMET-QoL-10) measure on MBC patients with BM. Methods Patients completed the BOMET-QoL-10 questionnaire, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, and a self-perceived health status item at baseline and at follow-up visits. We performed psychometric tests and calculated the effect size of specific BM treatment on patients´ HRQoL. Results Almost 70% of the 172 patients reported symptoms, 23.3% experienced irruptive pain, and over half were receiving chemotherapy. BOMET-QoL-10 proved to be a quick assessment tool performing well in readability and completion time (about 10 min) with 0–1.2% of missing/invalid data. Although BOMET-QoL-10 scores remained fairly stable during study visits, differences were observed for patient subgroups (e.g., with or without skeletal-related events or adverse effects). Scores were significantly correlated with physician-reported patient status, patient-reported pain, symptoms, and perceived health status. BOMET-QoL-10 scores also varied prospectively according to changes in pain intensity. Conclusions BOMET-QoL-10 performed well as a brief, easy-to-administer, useful, and sensitive HRQoL measure for potential use for clinical practice with MBC patients. Trial registration NCT03847220. Retrospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (February the 20th 2019).

The Keloid Intervention Benefit Inventory 21: A New Assessment Tool for the Quality of Life of Patients with Auricular Keloids

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Häussler ◽  
Stefanie Hüttemann ◽  
Christel Weiß ◽  
Nicole Karoline Rotter ◽  
Haneen Sadick
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Physical Symptoms ◽  
Medical Intervention ◽  
Medical Interventions ◽  
Before And After

Abstract Purpose The assessment of the quality of life (QoL) of patients with chronic diseases before and after medical interventions has gained increasing importance in recent decades. Particularly for patients with visible keloid scars in the head and neck region, standardized measurement tools are either absent or have been shown to be insufficient. The aim of the present study was to create a new standardized questionnaire that is specific to auricular keloid patients and reflects their clinical symptoms and QoL. Methods The Keloid Intervention Benefit Inventory 21 (KIBI-21) questionnaire was developed in two stages. First, a group of experts identified a pool of 26 questions and modified and supplemented the items through a comparison with existing QoL assessments so that they related to keloid-specific clinical symptoms and the QoL of patients with auricular keloids before and after a medical intervention. This questionnaire was distributed to 27 outpatients who had undergone medical interventions for visible auricular keloids. Second, a sequential statistical analysis was conducted. This included a single-item assessment and reduction, analysis for internal consistency, construct validity, and divergence validity as well as a factor analysis. The analyses were performed for the entire questionnaire and for the items in the subcategories General Health, Physical Symptoms, Self-Esteem, and Social Impact. Results The final version of this newly validated and standardized KIBI questionnaire consisted of 21 items, of which each item was assigned to only one subscale. The questionnaire showed a Cronbach's α of 0.84 with a good internal consistency. In the item correlation validity, strong associations were found in all subscales, except for the Social Impact Subscale. Conclusion The keloid-specific QoL questionnaire KIBI-21 proved to be a reliable and reproducible instrument to assess the QoL and clinical symptoms in patients suffering from auricular keloids before and after a medical treatment.

Quality of life in individuals newly diagnosed with multiple sclerosis or clinically isolated syndrome

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin N. Alschuler ◽  
Daniel Whibley ◽  
Anna L. Kratz ◽  
Mark P. Jensen ◽  
Annette Wundes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Clinically Isolated Syndrome ◽  
Newly Diagnosed

ENGOT-en11/GOG-3053/KEYNOTE-B21: Phase 3 study of pembrolizumab or placebo in combination with adjuvant chemotherapy with/without radiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed high-risk endometrial cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS5608-TPS5608
Author(s):  
Toon Van Gorp ◽  
Mansoor Raza Mirza ◽  
Alain Lortholary ◽  
David Cibula ◽  
Axel Walther ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Eortc Qlq

TPS5608 Background: Pembrolizumab, a selective humanized anti–PD-1 monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated activity in patients with previously treated mismatch repair (MMR) deficient (dMMR; 57.1% ORR as monotherapy and 63.6% ORR as combination therapy with lenvatinib) and MMR proficient (pMMR; 36.2% ORR as combination therapy with lenvatinib) endometrial cancer (EC). ENGOT-en11/GOG-3053/KEYNOTE-B21 is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind study of pembrolizumab or placebo in combination with adjuvant chemotherapy with/without radiotherapy in patients with EC. Methods: Eligible patients are ≥18 years old with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed high-risk (stage I/II non-endometrioid, stage III/IVa, p53 abnormality) EC (carcinoma or carcinosarcoma) following surgery with curative intent with no evidence of disease post-operatively or on imaging, and without prior systemic therapy/radiotherapy. In total, ̃990 patients are randomized to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo Q3W for 6 cycles + chemotherapy (carboplatin area under the curve [AUC] 5 or 6 + paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 Q3W or carboplatin AUC 2 or 2.7 + paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 QW) in stage 1. Patients receive pembrolizumab 400 mg or placebo Q6W for 6 cycles in stage 2 per their treatment assignment. At the investigator’s discretion, radiotherapy (external beam radiotherapy [EBRT] and/or brachytherapy) ± radiosensitizing cisplatin 50 mg/m2 (days 1 and 29) may be administered after completion of chemotherapy. Randomization is stratified by MMR status (pMMR vs dMMR) and, within pMMR, by planned radiation therapy (cisplatin-EBRT vs EBRT vs no EBRT), histology (endometrioid vs non-endometrioid), and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) surgical stage (I/II vs III/IVA). Dual primary endpoints are disease-free survival (DFS; per investigator assessment) and overall survival (OS), both estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, with a stratified log-rank test to assess treatment differences and a Cox proportional hazard model with Efron’s method of tie handling to assess the magnitude of treatment differences. Secondary endpoints include DFS (per blinded independent central review), DFS (per investigator assessment) and OS by biomarker status (PD-L1 and tumor mutational burden), safety (per National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0) and quality of life (per European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 [EORTC QLQ-C30] and Endometrial Cancer Module [EORTC QLQ-EN24]). The study began enrollment in December 2020. Clinical trial information: NCT04634877.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document