Cancer patients’ control preferences in decision making and associations with patient-reported outcomes: a prospective study in an outpatient cancer center

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 2753-2760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Schuler ◽  
Jan Schildmann ◽  
Freya Trautmann ◽  
Leopold Hentschel ◽  
Beate Hornemann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
A Prospective Study

A prospective study of elderly initiating mirabegron versus antimuscarinics: Patient reported outcomes from the Overactive Bladder Satisfaction Scales and other instruments

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suvapun Bunniran ◽  
Cralen Davis ◽  
Rita Kristy ◽  
Daniel Ng ◽  
Carol R. Schermer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overactive Bladder ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
A Prospective Study

Improvements in satisfaction with skin after treatment of facial fine lines with VYC‐12 injectable gel: Patient‐reported outcomes from a prospective study

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 1065-1070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Ogilvie ◽  
Marva Safa ◽  
Jonquille Chantrey ◽  
Christophe Leys ◽  
Maurizio Cavallini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
A Prospective Study

A Prospective Study of Patient Reported Outcomes in Pancreatic and Peri-ampullary Malignancy

2013 ◽  
Vol 37 (10) ◽  
pp. 2443-2453 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. E. Rees ◽  
R. C. Macefield ◽  
N. S. Blencowe ◽  
D. Alderson ◽  
M. D. Finch-Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
A Prospective Study

scholarly journals Physical Performance Tests Correlate With Patient-reported Outcomes After Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Prospective Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Scott ◽  
Michael C. Willey ◽  
John C. Davison ◽  
Robert W. Westermann ◽  
Amanda C. Paulson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Study ◽  
Physical Performance ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Periacetabular Osteotomy ◽  
Performance Tests ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
A Prospective Study

The effect of pre-operative diagnosis on patient reported outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal operations: A prospective study

2020 ◽  
Vol 220 (6) ◽  
pp. 1388-1392
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Yonkus ◽  
Cornelius A. Thiels ◽  
Pamela Skaran ◽  
Kellie L. Mathis ◽  
Juliane Bingener
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
A Prospective Study

Pilot study of iPad-based patient-reported outcomes at the MGH Cancer Center.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 190-190
Author(s):  
Aparna Raj Parikh ◽  
Margaret Soriano ◽  
Ephraim P. Hochberg ◽  
Courtney McLeish ◽  
Inga Tolin Lennes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Completion Rates ◽  
Breast Lymphoma ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Front Desk ◽  
Chemotherapy Patients ◽  
To Receive

190 Background: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) have been shown to improve outcomes in cancer patients in clinical trials and have also been shown to improve the patient experience, provide real-time access to patient reported symptoms and are increasingly used across disciplines. Given the importance of PROs, at the MGH Cancer Center, we implemented a pilot using iPADs to capture patient reported outcomes for patients receiving IV chemotherapy in the breast and lymphoma clinics as well all IV chemotherapy patients at one of the MGH satellite clinics where patients across all disease groups are seen. Methods: 12 measures from the PRO-CTCAE were selected to be applicable to all cancer patients. Working with the technology team and EPIC team at MGH the selected PROs were loaded into iPADs and are automatically assigned to patients receiving IV chemotherapy. Staff and clinicians were trained in the breast, lymphoma and satellite clinic. Patient who were receiving IV chemotherapy were assigned iPADs at check in. Patients completed the questionnaire and in real-time, the data was available in the EPIC chart. The objectives of the pilot were to assess the feasibility of collecting iPAD based PROs at the MGH Cancer Center. Results: In the 4-month pilot, there were 2,304 visit types that were eligible to receive an iPAD for PRO collection, 79% (N = 1,1816) patients were assigned an iPAD. Of the 1,816 patients assigned an iPAD, 65% (N = 1,173) patients completed the PROs, 4% (N = 36) partially completed the PROs. In terms of completion at the main disease specialty clinic vs the satellite, completion rates were higher at the satellite (77% vs 44%). During one week, we asked the front desk to record why patients did not complete the PROs-93 patients were assessed, 45% of patient refused the iPAD, in 28% of these patients the staff did not capture the reason and 22% were not given an iPAD. Conclusions: This pilot demonstrates the feasibility of collecting PROs in an oncology clinic for patients receiving IV chemotherapy. We plan to continue to improve the assignment of PROs to eligible patients, educate staff, providers and patients on the important of PROs and plan to expand to all the clinics at MGH Cancer Center and satellite centers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document