Quality measures for symptoms and advance care planning in cancer

A systematic review

Karl A. Lorenz, Joanne Lynn, Sydney E Dy, Anne Wilkinson, Richard A. Mularski, Lisa R. Shugarman, Rhonda Hughes, Steven M. Asch, Cony Rolon, Afshin Rastegar, Paul G. Shekelle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Measuring quality of care for symptom management and ascertaining patient goals offers an important step toward improving palliative cancer management. This study was designed to identify systematically the quality measures and the evidence to support their use in pain, dyspnea, depression, and advance care planning (ACP), and to identify research gaps. Methods: English-language documents were selected from MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, PsycINFO (1995 to 2005); Internet-based searches; and contact with measure developers. We used terms for each domain to select studies throughout the cancer care continuum. We included measures that expressed a normative relationship to quality, specified the target population, and specified the indicated care. Dual data review and abstraction was performed by palliative care researchers describing populations, testing, and attributes for each measure. Results: A total of 4,599 of 5,182 titles were excluded at abstract review. Of 537 remaining articles, 19 contained measures for ACP, six contained measures for depression, five contained measures for dyspnea, and 20 contained measures for pain. We identified 10 relevant measure sets that included 36 fully specified or fielded measures and 14 additional measures (16 for pain, five for dyspnea, four for depression, and 25 for ACP). Most measures were unpublished, and few had been tested in a cancer population. We were unable to describe the specifications of all measures fully and did not search for measures for pain and depression that were not cancer specific. Conclusion: Measures are available for assessing quality and guiding improvement in palliative cancer care. Existing measures are weighted toward ACP, and more nonpain symptom measures are needed. Additional testing is needed before the measures are used for accountability, and basic research is required to address measurement when self-report is impaired.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)4933-4938
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume24
Issue number30
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 20 2006

Fingerprint

Advance Care Planning
Dyspnea
Depression
Pain
Neoplasms
Palliative Care
Continuity of Patient Care
Quality of Health Care
Health Services Needs and Demand
Social Responsibility
Quality Improvement
Research
MEDLINE
Internet
Self Report
Population
Nursing
Language
Research Personnel
Health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

Lorenz, K. A., Lynn, J., Dy, S. E., Wilkinson, A., Mularski, R. A., Shugarman, L. R., ... Shekelle, P. G. (2006). Quality measures for symptoms and advance care planning in cancer: A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24(30), 4933-4938. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.06.8650

Quality measures for symptoms and advance care planning in cancer : A systematic review. / Lorenz, Karl A.; Lynn, Joanne; Dy, Sydney E; Wilkinson, Anne; Mularski, Richard A.; Shugarman, Lisa R.; Hughes, Rhonda; Asch, Steven M.; Rolon, Cony; Rastegar, Afshin; Shekelle, Paul G.

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 24, No. 30, 20.10.2006, p. 4933-4938.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lorenz, KA, Lynn, J, Dy, SE, Wilkinson, A, Mularski, RA, Shugarman, LR, Hughes, R, Asch, SM, Rolon, C, Rastegar, A & Shekelle, PG 2006, 'Quality measures for symptoms and advance care planning in cancer: A systematic review', Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 24, no. 30, pp. 4933-4938. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.06.8650
Lorenz, Karl A. ; Lynn, Joanne ; Dy, Sydney E ; Wilkinson, Anne ; Mularski, Richard A. ; Shugarman, Lisa R. ; Hughes, Rhonda ; Asch, Steven M. ; Rolon, Cony ; Rastegar, Afshin ; Shekelle, Paul G. / Quality measures for symptoms and advance care planning in cancer : A systematic review. In: Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2006 ; Vol. 24, No. 30. pp. 4933-4938.
@article{f98dea6f98834ea7acb572640378bf0d,
title = "Quality measures for symptoms and advance care planning in cancer: A systematic review",
abstract = "Purpose: Measuring quality of care for symptom management and ascertaining patient goals offers an important step toward improving palliative cancer management. This study was designed to identify systematically the quality measures and the evidence to support their use in pain, dyspnea, depression, and advance care planning (ACP), and to identify research gaps. Methods: English-language documents were selected from MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, PsycINFO (1995 to 2005); Internet-based searches; and contact with measure developers. We used terms for each domain to select studies throughout the cancer care continuum. We included measures that expressed a normative relationship to quality, specified the target population, and specified the indicated care. Dual data review and abstraction was performed by palliative care researchers describing populations, testing, and attributes for each measure. Results: A total of 4,599 of 5,182 titles were excluded at abstract review. Of 537 remaining articles, 19 contained measures for ACP, six contained measures for depression, five contained measures for dyspnea, and 20 contained measures for pain. We identified 10 relevant measure sets that included 36 fully specified or fielded measures and 14 additional measures (16 for pain, five for dyspnea, four for depression, and 25 for ACP). Most measures were unpublished, and few had been tested in a cancer population. We were unable to describe the specifications of all measures fully and did not search for measures for pain and depression that were not cancer specific. Conclusion: Measures are available for assessing quality and guiding improvement in palliative cancer care. Existing measures are weighted toward ACP, and more nonpain symptom measures are needed. Additional testing is needed before the measures are used for accountability, and basic research is required to address measurement when self-report is impaired.",
author = "Lorenz, {Karl A.} and Joanne Lynn and Dy, {Sydney E} and Anne Wilkinson and Mularski, {Richard A.} and Shugarman, {Lisa R.} and Rhonda Hughes and Asch, {Steven M.} and Cony Rolon and Afshin Rastegar and Shekelle, {Paul G.}",
year = "2006",
month = "10",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1200/JCO.2006.06.8650",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "4933--4938",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Oncology",
issn = "0732-183X",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Oncology",
number = "30",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quality measures for symptoms and advance care planning in cancer

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Lorenz, Karl A.

AU - Lynn, Joanne

AU - Dy, Sydney E

AU - Wilkinson, Anne

AU - Mularski, Richard A.

AU - Shugarman, Lisa R.

AU - Hughes, Rhonda

AU - Asch, Steven M.

AU - Rolon, Cony

AU - Rastegar, Afshin

AU - Shekelle, Paul G.

PY - 2006/10/20

Y1 - 2006/10/20

N2 - Purpose: Measuring quality of care for symptom management and ascertaining patient goals offers an important step toward improving palliative cancer management. This study was designed to identify systematically the quality measures and the evidence to support their use in pain, dyspnea, depression, and advance care planning (ACP), and to identify research gaps. Methods: English-language documents were selected from MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, PsycINFO (1995 to 2005); Internet-based searches; and contact with measure developers. We used terms for each domain to select studies throughout the cancer care continuum. We included measures that expressed a normative relationship to quality, specified the target population, and specified the indicated care. Dual data review and abstraction was performed by palliative care researchers describing populations, testing, and attributes for each measure. Results: A total of 4,599 of 5,182 titles were excluded at abstract review. Of 537 remaining articles, 19 contained measures for ACP, six contained measures for depression, five contained measures for dyspnea, and 20 contained measures for pain. We identified 10 relevant measure sets that included 36 fully specified or fielded measures and 14 additional measures (16 for pain, five for dyspnea, four for depression, and 25 for ACP). Most measures were unpublished, and few had been tested in a cancer population. We were unable to describe the specifications of all measures fully and did not search for measures for pain and depression that were not cancer specific. Conclusion: Measures are available for assessing quality and guiding improvement in palliative cancer care. Existing measures are weighted toward ACP, and more nonpain symptom measures are needed. Additional testing is needed before the measures are used for accountability, and basic research is required to address measurement when self-report is impaired.

AB - Purpose: Measuring quality of care for symptom management and ascertaining patient goals offers an important step toward improving palliative cancer management. This study was designed to identify systematically the quality measures and the evidence to support their use in pain, dyspnea, depression, and advance care planning (ACP), and to identify research gaps. Methods: English-language documents were selected from MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, PsycINFO (1995 to 2005); Internet-based searches; and contact with measure developers. We used terms for each domain to select studies throughout the cancer care continuum. We included measures that expressed a normative relationship to quality, specified the target population, and specified the indicated care. Dual data review and abstraction was performed by palliative care researchers describing populations, testing, and attributes for each measure. Results: A total of 4,599 of 5,182 titles were excluded at abstract review. Of 537 remaining articles, 19 contained measures for ACP, six contained measures for depression, five contained measures for dyspnea, and 20 contained measures for pain. We identified 10 relevant measure sets that included 36 fully specified or fielded measures and 14 additional measures (16 for pain, five for dyspnea, four for depression, and 25 for ACP). Most measures were unpublished, and few had been tested in a cancer population. We were unable to describe the specifications of all measures fully and did not search for measures for pain and depression that were not cancer specific. Conclusion: Measures are available for assessing quality and guiding improvement in palliative cancer care. Existing measures are weighted toward ACP, and more nonpain symptom measures are needed. Additional testing is needed before the measures are used for accountability, and basic research is required to address measurement when self-report is impaired.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33750623921&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33750623921&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.8650

DO - 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.8650

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 4933

EP - 4938

JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology

JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology

SN - 0732-183X

IS - 30

ER -