Relevant content for a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire for use in oncology clinical practice: Putting doctors and patients on the same page

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate relevant patient-reported outcome (PRO) domains for oncology clinical practice. Methods We conducted cross-sectional semi-structured telephone interviews with patients with breast and prostate cancer and clinicians. Using open-ended questions followed by structured prompts of PRO domains, subjects were asked what they currently discuss during visits and which topics are relevant for a clinical practice PRO. For each domain, we calculated the percentage of patients and clinicians who responded positively. A qualitative thematic content analysis identified barriers and benefits of using PROs in clinical practice. Results A total of 41 patients (21 breast cancer and 20 prostate cancer) and 15 clinicians (7 medical oncologists, 5 radiation oncologists, and 3 surgeons) completed the interviews. In general, clinicians and patients reported that the topics explored were relevant. Barriers to using PROs in clinical practice include (1) time constraints, (2) varying relevance of questions, (3) value of the conversational approach, (4) decreased usefulness in established relationships, and (5) respondent burden. Benefits of PROs in clinical practice include (1) identifying problems, (2) serving as a reminder of topics to discuss, and (3) tracking changes over time. Conclusions PROs in clinical practice may help triage issues and focus discussions. Computer-adaptive tests should be explored to tailor questionnaires to patients' specific issues.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1045-1055
Number of pages11
JournalQuality of Life Research
Volume19
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2010

Fingerprint

Medical Oncology
Prostatic Neoplasms
Interviews
Breast Neoplasms
Triage
Surveys and Questionnaires
Patient Reported Outcome Measures

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Clinical practice
  • Content validity
  • Patient-reported outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

@article{e82a354b8b0a47bd93fe0d49285d6492,
title = "Relevant content for a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire for use in oncology clinical practice: Putting doctors and patients on the same page",
abstract = "Purpose: To investigate relevant patient-reported outcome (PRO) domains for oncology clinical practice. Methods We conducted cross-sectional semi-structured telephone interviews with patients with breast and prostate cancer and clinicians. Using open-ended questions followed by structured prompts of PRO domains, subjects were asked what they currently discuss during visits and which topics are relevant for a clinical practice PRO. For each domain, we calculated the percentage of patients and clinicians who responded positively. A qualitative thematic content analysis identified barriers and benefits of using PROs in clinical practice. Results A total of 41 patients (21 breast cancer and 20 prostate cancer) and 15 clinicians (7 medical oncologists, 5 radiation oncologists, and 3 surgeons) completed the interviews. In general, clinicians and patients reported that the topics explored were relevant. Barriers to using PROs in clinical practice include (1) time constraints, (2) varying relevance of questions, (3) value of the conversational approach, (4) decreased usefulness in established relationships, and (5) respondent burden. Benefits of PROs in clinical practice include (1) identifying problems, (2) serving as a reminder of topics to discuss, and (3) tracking changes over time. Conclusions PROs in clinical practice may help triage issues and focus discussions. Computer-adaptive tests should be explored to tailor questionnaires to patients' specific issues.",
keywords = "Cancer, Clinical practice, Content validity, Patient-reported outcomes",
author = "Claire Snyder and Jensen, {Roxanne E.} and Gail Geller and Carducci, {Michael A} and Wu, {Albert W}",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1007/s11136-010-9655-z",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "1045--1055",
journal = "Quality of Life Research",
issn = "0962-9343",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Relevant content for a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire for use in oncology clinical practice

T2 - Putting doctors and patients on the same page

AU - Snyder, Claire

AU - Jensen, Roxanne E.

AU - Geller, Gail

AU - Carducci, Michael A

AU - Wu, Albert W

PY - 2010/9

Y1 - 2010/9

N2 - Purpose: To investigate relevant patient-reported outcome (PRO) domains for oncology clinical practice. Methods We conducted cross-sectional semi-structured telephone interviews with patients with breast and prostate cancer and clinicians. Using open-ended questions followed by structured prompts of PRO domains, subjects were asked what they currently discuss during visits and which topics are relevant for a clinical practice PRO. For each domain, we calculated the percentage of patients and clinicians who responded positively. A qualitative thematic content analysis identified barriers and benefits of using PROs in clinical practice. Results A total of 41 patients (21 breast cancer and 20 prostate cancer) and 15 clinicians (7 medical oncologists, 5 radiation oncologists, and 3 surgeons) completed the interviews. In general, clinicians and patients reported that the topics explored were relevant. Barriers to using PROs in clinical practice include (1) time constraints, (2) varying relevance of questions, (3) value of the conversational approach, (4) decreased usefulness in established relationships, and (5) respondent burden. Benefits of PROs in clinical practice include (1) identifying problems, (2) serving as a reminder of topics to discuss, and (3) tracking changes over time. Conclusions PROs in clinical practice may help triage issues and focus discussions. Computer-adaptive tests should be explored to tailor questionnaires to patients' specific issues.

AB - Purpose: To investigate relevant patient-reported outcome (PRO) domains for oncology clinical practice. Methods We conducted cross-sectional semi-structured telephone interviews with patients with breast and prostate cancer and clinicians. Using open-ended questions followed by structured prompts of PRO domains, subjects were asked what they currently discuss during visits and which topics are relevant for a clinical practice PRO. For each domain, we calculated the percentage of patients and clinicians who responded positively. A qualitative thematic content analysis identified barriers and benefits of using PROs in clinical practice. Results A total of 41 patients (21 breast cancer and 20 prostate cancer) and 15 clinicians (7 medical oncologists, 5 radiation oncologists, and 3 surgeons) completed the interviews. In general, clinicians and patients reported that the topics explored were relevant. Barriers to using PROs in clinical practice include (1) time constraints, (2) varying relevance of questions, (3) value of the conversational approach, (4) decreased usefulness in established relationships, and (5) respondent burden. Benefits of PROs in clinical practice include (1) identifying problems, (2) serving as a reminder of topics to discuss, and (3) tracking changes over time. Conclusions PROs in clinical practice may help triage issues and focus discussions. Computer-adaptive tests should be explored to tailor questionnaires to patients' specific issues.

KW - Cancer

KW - Clinical practice

KW - Content validity

KW - Patient-reported outcomes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951727612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79951727612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11136-010-9655-z

DO - 10.1007/s11136-010-9655-z

M3 - Article

C2 - 20424920

AN - SCOPUS:79951727612

VL - 19

SP - 1045

EP - 1055

JO - Quality of Life Research

JF - Quality of Life Research

SN - 0962-9343

IS - 7

ER -