scholarly journals The patient-reported outcome measures in oropharyngeal, laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer patients treated with Volumetric Modulated Arc based simultaneous integrated boost radiotherapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Thiraviyam Elumalai ◽  
Ashutosh Mukherji ◽  
N. Vijayaprabhu ◽  
Kannan Periasamy ◽  
Amdedkar Yadala
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Hypopharyngeal Cancer ◽  
Simultaneous Integrated Boost ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Integrated Boost ◽  
Boost Radiotherapy

scholarly journals Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for quality of care assessment: a pilot study protocol

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
A J Fauci ◽  
A Acampora ◽  
C Cadeddu ◽  
C Angioletti ◽  
A G De Belvis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Evaluation ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients

Abstract Background There is emerging interest in integrating Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) into the assessment of care quality. This study protocol aims at testing the collection and use of PROMs for evaluating and comparing health outcomes by patients with colorectal cancer. This is part of a project of the Istituto Superiore di Sanità and Gruppo Italiano di Reti Oncologiche (GIRO) aimed at promoting Value-Based Healthcare (VBHC) for performance evaluation of oncological healthcare providers. Methods A multicentric prospective observational study will be conducted at the seven GIRO oncological hospitals. For each hospital, 40 colorectal cancer patients undergoing either surgery or surgery plus neoadjuvant therapy, will be recruited (20 colon; 20 rectum) over 12 months. The data will be collected twice (before and after surgery) or three times for patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, by using EORTC-C30, a generic module for cancer patients and EORTC-CR29, a specific module for colorectal cancer patients. Collected data will be analyzed descriptively and the scores of each hospital will be compared to the overall scores of all the centers. Additional medical information will be used to adjust for the center casemix. Feedback from health professionals and patients will be collected through structured questionnaires and focus groups. Results The results will be interpreted to assess and compare the health outcomes reported by the patients among the GIRO hospitals. Feedback from health professionals and patients will help identify barriers and facilitators of implementation of PROs collection. Conclusions PROMs have the potential to systematically incorporate the patient perspective into the health outcome measurements for performance evaluation and benchmarking, which is essential to delivering high-value patient-centered care. The PROMs collected in this study will be integrated in a set of process and outcome indicators previously defined within same project. Key messages Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) have the potential to systematically incorporate the patient perspective, which is essential to delivering high-value patient-centered care. It is critical to integrate PROMs in performance evaluation and comparison among oncological healthcare providers for improving the quality of care in a Value-Based Healthcare perspective.

Patient reported outcome measures in breast cancer patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (7) ◽  
pp. 963-968 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Lagendijk ◽  
L.S.E. van Egdom ◽  
C. Richel ◽  
N. van Leeuwen ◽  
C. Verhoef ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Patient Reported

Why focus on patient-reported outcome measures in older colorectal cancer patients?

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 394-401 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Doolin ◽  
Meredith Halpin ◽  
Jonathan L. Berry ◽  
Tammy Hshieh ◽  
Jessica A. Zerillo
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients

scholarly journals Characteristics and Patient-reported Outcomes Associated to Dropout in Severely Affected Oncological Patients

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pimrapat Gebert ◽  
Daniel Schindel ◽  
Johann Frick ◽  
Liane Schenk ◽  
Ulrike Grittner
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Social Support ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures are commonly used and are surrogates for clinical outcomes in cancer research. In the research setting of very severe diseases such as cancer, it is difficult to avoid the problem of incomplete questionnaires from drop-out or missing data due to patients who deceased during observation period. We aimed to explore patient characteristics and patient-reported outcomes associated with the time-to-dropout. MethodsIn the Oncological Social Care Project (OSCAR) study the condition of participants was assessed four times within 12 months (t0: baseline, t1: 3 months, t2: 6 months, t3:12 months) by validated patient-reported outcome measures. We performed competing-risks regression based on Fine and Gray’s proportional sub-distribution hazards model for exploring factors associated with time-to-dropout. Death was considered a competing risk. ResultsThree hundred sixty-two participants were analyzed in the study. 193 (53.3%) completed follow-up at 12 months, 67 (18.5%) patients dropped out, and 102 patients (28.2%) died during the study period. Poor subjective social support was related to higher risk for drop-out (SHR=2.10; 95%CI: 1.01 – 4.35). Lower values in quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) were related to drop-out and death. The subscales global health status/QoL, role functioning, physical functioning, and fatigue symptom were key characteristics associated with drop-out.ConclusionSeverely affected cancer patients with poor social support and poor quality of life seem more likely to drop out of studies compared to patients with higher levels of social support and quality of life. This should be considered when planning studies assessing cancer patients. Methods to monitor drop-outs timely and handle missing outcomes might be used. Results of such studies have to be interpreted with caution in light of the particular drop-out mechanisms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document