A systematic review of patient-reported outcome instruments of nonmelanoma skin cancer in the dermatologic population

Lee, Erica H.; Klassen, Anne F.; Nehal, Kishwer S.; Cano, Stefan; Waters, J. Dawn; Pusic, Andrea L.

doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2012.09.017

Cited by 68 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4,12 Although the rate of traditional adverse events (e.g. infection) are low in dermatologic surgery, when patients were asked to comment on problems and complications, a broader range of concerns were elicited.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2,3 In a systematic review of PRO instruments, the Skin Cancer Index addressed appearance concerns but was not specific to the facial area. 4 The POS-Head/Neck was developed for surgical procedures of the head/neck area; however, as the interview group did not include NMSC patients, it may not be sensitive to issues related to this population. 5 There are recent PRO instruments but were not designed to assess issues specific to facial areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patient experiences and outcomes following facial skin cancer surgery: A qualitative study

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer of the facial area are primarily treated with surgery. There is little known about patient outcomes of the facial skin cancer population. The objective of the study was to identify aesthetic, procedure and health-related concerns from the patient's perspective after facial skin surgery. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 15 participants. Line-by-line coding was used to establish categories and develop themes. We identified five major themes related to the impact of skin cancer surgery: appearance-related concerns; psychological function (e.g. fear of new cancers, recurrence); social function (e.g. impact on social activities and interaction); adverse problems (e.g. pain, swelling) and satisfaction with the experience of care (e.g. satisfaction with surgeon). The priority of participants was the removal of the facial skin cancer as this diminished their overall worry. The aesthetic outcome was secondary but important as it had important implications on the participant's social and psychological functioning. The participant's experience with the care provided by the surgeon and staff also contributed to treatment satisfaction. This conceptual framework provides the basis for the development of a new patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient experiences and outcomes following facial skin cancer surgery: A qualitative study

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Generic PROMs (SF36: Medical Outcomes Study 36‐item Short Form Health Survey, Sickness Impact Profile) and general dermatology instruments (Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and Skindex) have been evaluated in NMSC but data suggest the tools fail to identify HRQOL issues pertinent to NMSC diagnoses. Cancer‐specific PROMs are more sensitive in capturing relevant issues, such as scarring, disfigurement, anxiety and fear of future skin cancers .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of the Skin Cancer Quality of Life Impact Tool (SCQOLIT) – a feasibility study in non‐melanoma skin cancer

Wali

Gibbons

Kelly

et al. 2019

Acad Dermatol Venereol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Incidence of non‐melanoma skin cancers (NMSCs) is increasing and can significantly impact on quality of life (QOL), yet there are few studies evaluating patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) in NMSC populations. We undertook a prospective feasibility study to evaluate a skin cancer‐specific PROM, the Skin Cancer Quality of Life Impact Tool (SCQOLIT), in patients with a new diagnosis of NMSC. Objectives (i) To establish acceptability of SCQOLIT in dermatology clinics, (ii) a descriptive analysis of SCQOLIT scores in NMSC. Methods Patients with histologically confirmed NMSC completed SCQOLIT, EQ‐5D and a transition item. Questionnaires were completed at baseline and 3 months for group 1 (‘low‐risk’ NMSC) and group 2 (‘high‐risk’ NMSC) with additional questionnaires at 6–9 months for group 2. Patients participated in structured interviews. Clinician experience was captured through staff evaluation forms and a focus group. Acceptability and psychometric properties of SCQOLIT were assessed. Results Overall, 318 patients consented to participate. Mean SCQOLIT score at baseline was 5.33, with 2.6% of patients scoring ≥20. No ceiling effects were observed, whilst 13.9% scored 0. Validity was demonstrated against EQ‐5D. Cronbach's alpha 0.84 demonstrated internal consistency. Thirteen patients were interviewed and thought SCQOLIT was comprehensive, captured impact on health‐related QOL and helped express their needs to clinicians. Most clinicians found SCQOLIT ‘very useful’ or ‘useful to some extent’ in facilitating discussions. Conclusions This feasibility study demonstrates that SCQOLIT is acceptable to patients and staff in dermatology skin cancer clinics. The psychometric properties of SCQOLIT confirm its utility in NMSC populations.

show abstract

“…Our results suggest that Skindex was a better reflection than SCI of the changes from topical 5‐FU, because more Skindex subscales were responsive to 5‐FU compared with SCI subscales, the changes in Skindex subscales were associated with the number of AK (which can be a proxy for actinic damage, whose severity is related to exuberant reaction to 5‐FU), and the Skindex subscales correlated better with the other measures of 5‐FU AEs. KC‐specific QoL instruments are anecdotally considered to capture KC‐related outcomes better than nonspecific dermatology ones . However, our study indicates that the nonspecific dermatology QoL instrument (Skindex) performed better than the KC‐specific QoL instrument (SCI) in detecting QoL changes associated with topical treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

“…KC-specific QoL instruments are anecdotally considered to capture KC-related outcomes better than nonspecific dermatology ones. 3,4,9,18,19 However, our study indicates that the nonspecific dermatology QoL instrument (Skindex) performed better than the KC-specific QoL instrument (SCI) in detecting QoL changes associated with topical treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Validation and comparison of quality-of-life measures for topical 5-fluorouracil treatment: results from a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome instruments of nonmelanoma skin cancer in the dermatologic population

Cited by 68 publications

References 36 publications

Patient experiences and outcomes following facial skin cancer surgery: A qualitative study

Patient experiences and outcomes following facial skin cancer surgery: A qualitative study

Use of the Skin Cancer Quality of Life Impact Tool (SCQOLIT) – a feasibility study in non‐melanoma skin cancer

Validation and comparison of quality-of-life measures for topical 5-fluorouracil treatment: results from a randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About