When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters

A randomized controlled trial

Claire Snyder, Joseph M. Herman, Sharon M. White, Brandon S. Luber, Amanda L. Blackford, Michael A Carducci, Albert W Wu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are increasingly being used in clinical practice to inform individual patient management, but evidence is needed on which PROs are best suited for clinical use. Methods: This controlled trial randomly assigned patients with breast and prostate cancer undergoing treatment to complete one of three PRO measures: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form (SCNS-SF34), or six domains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Patients completed the PRO measures before clinic visits, and the results were provided to both the patient and clinician. At treatment completion, patients and clinicians completed brief feedback forms on the intervention's usefulness and value. Exit interviews were conducted with patients (at end of treatment) and clinicians (at end of study). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each arm who either strongly agreed or agreed to all feedback form items. Results: Of 294 eligible patients invited to participate, 224 (76%) enrolled (median age 66 years, 78% white, 72% prostate). Of the 181 patients (81%) who completed at least one feedback form item, participants in the QLQ-C30 study arm were most likely to strongly agree/agree to all items (74%) followed by PROMIS (61%) and SCNS-SF34 (52%; P = .03). Of the 116 participants (52%) who completed all feedback form items, the results were similar: 82% for the QLQ-C30, 62% for PROMIS, and 56% for SCNS-SF34 (P = .05). Clinicians did not prefer one questionnaire over the others. Conclusion: These results suggest that, when using PROs in clinical practice for patient management, the measure matters in terms of usefulness to patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e299-e306
JournalJournal of Oncology Practice
Volume10
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2014

Fingerprint

Randomized Controlled Trials
Information Systems
Quality of Life
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Practice Management
Ambulatory Care
Prostate
Prostatic Neoplasms
Therapeutics
Surveys and Questionnaires
Interviews
Breast Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Oncology(nursing)
  • Health Policy

Cite this

When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters : A randomized controlled trial. / Snyder, Claire; Herman, Joseph M.; White, Sharon M.; Luber, Brandon S.; Blackford, Amanda L.; Carducci, Michael A; Wu, Albert W.

In: Journal of Oncology Practice, Vol. 10, No. 5, 01.09.2014, p. e299-e306.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Snyder, Claire ; Herman, Joseph M. ; White, Sharon M. ; Luber, Brandon S. ; Blackford, Amanda L. ; Carducci, Michael A ; Wu, Albert W. / When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters : A randomized controlled trial. In: Journal of Oncology Practice. 2014 ; Vol. 10, No. 5. pp. e299-e306.
@article{443e99872c554837a0f26e0f5f586030,
title = "When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters: A randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are increasingly being used in clinical practice to inform individual patient management, but evidence is needed on which PROs are best suited for clinical use. Methods: This controlled trial randomly assigned patients with breast and prostate cancer undergoing treatment to complete one of three PRO measures: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form (SCNS-SF34), or six domains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Patients completed the PRO measures before clinic visits, and the results were provided to both the patient and clinician. At treatment completion, patients and clinicians completed brief feedback forms on the intervention's usefulness and value. Exit interviews were conducted with patients (at end of treatment) and clinicians (at end of study). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each arm who either strongly agreed or agreed to all feedback form items. Results: Of 294 eligible patients invited to participate, 224 (76{\%}) enrolled (median age 66 years, 78{\%} white, 72{\%} prostate). Of the 181 patients (81{\%}) who completed at least one feedback form item, participants in the QLQ-C30 study arm were most likely to strongly agree/agree to all items (74{\%}) followed by PROMIS (61{\%}) and SCNS-SF34 (52{\%}; P = .03). Of the 116 participants (52{\%}) who completed all feedback form items, the results were similar: 82{\%} for the QLQ-C30, 62{\%} for PROMIS, and 56{\%} for SCNS-SF34 (P = .05). Clinicians did not prefer one questionnaire over the others. Conclusion: These results suggest that, when using PROs in clinical practice for patient management, the measure matters in terms of usefulness to patients.",
author = "Claire Snyder and Herman, {Joseph M.} and White, {Sharon M.} and Luber, {Brandon S.} and Blackford, {Amanda L.} and Carducci, {Michael A} and Wu, {Albert W}",
year = "2014",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1200/JOP.2014.001413",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "e299--e306",
journal = "Journal of Oncology Practice",
issn = "1554-7477",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Oncology",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters

T2 - A randomized controlled trial

AU - Snyder, Claire

AU - Herman, Joseph M.

AU - White, Sharon M.

AU - Luber, Brandon S.

AU - Blackford, Amanda L.

AU - Carducci, Michael A

AU - Wu, Albert W

PY - 2014/9/1

Y1 - 2014/9/1

N2 - Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are increasingly being used in clinical practice to inform individual patient management, but evidence is needed on which PROs are best suited for clinical use. Methods: This controlled trial randomly assigned patients with breast and prostate cancer undergoing treatment to complete one of three PRO measures: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form (SCNS-SF34), or six domains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Patients completed the PRO measures before clinic visits, and the results were provided to both the patient and clinician. At treatment completion, patients and clinicians completed brief feedback forms on the intervention's usefulness and value. Exit interviews were conducted with patients (at end of treatment) and clinicians (at end of study). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each arm who either strongly agreed or agreed to all feedback form items. Results: Of 294 eligible patients invited to participate, 224 (76%) enrolled (median age 66 years, 78% white, 72% prostate). Of the 181 patients (81%) who completed at least one feedback form item, participants in the QLQ-C30 study arm were most likely to strongly agree/agree to all items (74%) followed by PROMIS (61%) and SCNS-SF34 (52%; P = .03). Of the 116 participants (52%) who completed all feedback form items, the results were similar: 82% for the QLQ-C30, 62% for PROMIS, and 56% for SCNS-SF34 (P = .05). Clinicians did not prefer one questionnaire over the others. Conclusion: These results suggest that, when using PROs in clinical practice for patient management, the measure matters in terms of usefulness to patients.

AB - Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are increasingly being used in clinical practice to inform individual patient management, but evidence is needed on which PROs are best suited for clinical use. Methods: This controlled trial randomly assigned patients with breast and prostate cancer undergoing treatment to complete one of three PRO measures: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form (SCNS-SF34), or six domains from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Patients completed the PRO measures before clinic visits, and the results were provided to both the patient and clinician. At treatment completion, patients and clinicians completed brief feedback forms on the intervention's usefulness and value. Exit interviews were conducted with patients (at end of treatment) and clinicians (at end of study). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each arm who either strongly agreed or agreed to all feedback form items. Results: Of 294 eligible patients invited to participate, 224 (76%) enrolled (median age 66 years, 78% white, 72% prostate). Of the 181 patients (81%) who completed at least one feedback form item, participants in the QLQ-C30 study arm were most likely to strongly agree/agree to all items (74%) followed by PROMIS (61%) and SCNS-SF34 (52%; P = .03). Of the 116 participants (52%) who completed all feedback form items, the results were similar: 82% for the QLQ-C30, 62% for PROMIS, and 56% for SCNS-SF34 (P = .05). Clinicians did not prefer one questionnaire over the others. Conclusion: These results suggest that, when using PROs in clinical practice for patient management, the measure matters in terms of usefulness to patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84911934207&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84911934207&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1200/JOP.2014.001413

DO - 10.1200/JOP.2014.001413

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - e299-e306

JO - Journal of Oncology Practice

JF - Journal of Oncology Practice

SN - 1554-7477

IS - 5

ER -