Development and prospective evaluation of CAPLET, a cancer ambulatory patient physical function longitudinal evaluation tool for routine clinical practice

Hall, Elizabeth; Tam, Emily; Liang, Mindy; Zhang, Quihuang; Liu, Lin; Wong, Lauren; Sarabia, Samantha; Yeung, Sabrina; Gill, Gursharan; Eng, Lawson; Perez-Cosio, Andrea; Brown, M. Catherine; Xu, Wei; Li, Madeline; Mittmann, Nicole; Jones, Jennifer; Howell, Doris; Liu, Geoffrey

doi:10.1007/s00520-018-4333-8

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Incorporating branching logic and adaptive response functions into the PRO instruments [ 23 , 36 ] may also help to identify individuals who need more detailed assessments; this approach may potentially limit survey burden, minimize administration time, and improve patient receptivity. [ 37 ] In this regard, HICs are in an excellent position to share resources, such as PRO experts, translated tools, and patient education materials, with LMICs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer care: preliminary insights from a multinational scoping survey of oncology practitioners

Cheung

Chan

Charalambous

et al. 2021

Support Care Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There exists scant evidence on the optimal approaches to integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical practice. This study gathered oncology practitioners’ experiences with implementing PROs in cancer care. Methods Between December 2019 and June 2020, we surveyed practitioners who reported spending > 5% of their time providing clinical care to cancer patients. Respondents completed an online survey describing their experiences with and barriers to using PROs in clinical settings. Results In total, 362 practitioners (physicians 38.7%, nurses 46.7%, allied health professionals 14.6%) completed the survey, representing 41 countries (Asia–Pacific 42.5%, North America 30.1%, Europe 24.0%, others 3.3%). One quarter (25.4%) identified themselves as “high frequency users” who conducted PRO assessments on > 80% of their patients. Practitioners commonly used PROs to facilitate communication (60.2%) and monitor treatment responses (52.6%). The most commonly reported implementation barriers were a lack of technological support (70.4%) and absence of a robust workflow to integrate PROs in clinical care (61.5%). Compared to practitioners from high-income countries, more practitioners in low-middle income countries reported not having access to a local PRO expert ( P < .0001) and difficulty in identifying the appropriate PRO domains ( P = .006). Compared with nurses and allied health professionals, physicians were more likely to perceive disruptions in clinical care during PRO collection ( P = .001) as an implementation barrier. Conclusions Only a quarter of the surveyed practitioners reported capturing PROs in routine clinical practice. The implementation barriers to PRO use varied across respondents in different professions and levels of socioeconomic resources. Our findings can be applied to guide planning and implementation of PRO collection in cancer care. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-021-06545-7.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer care: preliminary insights from a multinational scoping survey of oncology practitioners

Cheung

Chan

Charalambous

et al. 2021

Support Care Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the use of ePROMs allows for computer adaptive testing (CAT), which personalises questions and reduces questionnaire burden for patients while maintaining superb measurement precision. [29][30][31] The US National Institute of Health-funded Patient Reported Outcome Measures Information System (PROMIS) has developed generic item banks to assess emotional, physical and social domains of health that are relevant for people with diverse chronic medical conditions. PROMIS item banks can be administered as fixed length short forms or as CATs.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This may facilitate integrated and collaborative symptom management and self-management support. In addition, the use of ePROMs allows for computer adaptive testing (CAT), which personalises questions and reduces questionnaire burden for patients while maintaining superb measurement precision 29–31…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self-reported MeasUrement of Physical and PsychosOcial Symptoms Response Tool (SUPPORT-dialysis): systematic symptom assessment and management in patients on in-centre haemodialysis – a parallel arm, non-randomised feasibility pilot study protocol

Gill,

Pucci,

Samudio

et al. 2024

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionPatients with kidney failure experience symptoms that are often under-recognised and undermanaged. These symptoms negatively impact health-related quality of life and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Regular symptom assessment, using electronic patient reported outcomes measure (ePROMs) linked to systematic symptom management, could improve such outcomes. Clinical implementation of ePROMs have been successful in routine oncology care, but not used for patients on dialysis. In this study, we describe a pilot study of ePROM-based systematic symptom monitoring and management intervention in patients treated with in-centre haemodialysis.Methods and analysisThis is a parallel-arm, controlled pilot of adult patients receiving in-centre maintenance haemodialysis. Participants in the intervention arm will complete ePROMs once a month for 6 months. ePROMs will be scored real time and the results will be shared with participants and with the clinical team. Moderate-severe symptoms will be flagged using established cut-off scores. Referral options for those symptoms will be shared with the clinical team, and additional symptom management resources will also be provided for both participants and clinicians. Participants in the control arm will be recruited at a different dialysis unit, to prevent contamination. They will receive usual care, except that they will complete ePROMs without the presentation of results to participants of the clinical team. The primary objectives of the pilot are to assess (1) the feasibility of a larger, randomised clinical effectiveness trial and (2) the acceptability of the intervention. Interviews conducted with participants and staff will be assessed using a content analysis approach.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for this study was obtained from the University Health Network (REB#21-5199) and the William Osler Health System (#23-0005). All study procedures will be conducted in accordance with the standards of University Health Network research ethics board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments. Results of this study will be shared with participants, patients on dialysis and other stakeholders using lay language summaries, oral presentations to patients and nephrology professionals. We will also be publishing the results in a peer-reviewed journal and at scientific meetings.Protocol version4 (16 November 2022).Trial registration numberNCT05515991.

show abstract

What is the most appropriate way to analyse the WHODAS 2.0 score?

Castro

Ferreira

Sampaio

et al. 2021

PPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is a practical, generic and widely used tool to assess the functioning and disability in several settings and health conditions. Although the use of categorical variables is common, this choice to present data could separate persons with very close functioning profiles into different categories. PURPOSE: This study aims to compare different ways of expressing the WHODAS score and give elements for the researcher to understand and choose the most appropriate way to statistically analyse the WHODAS scores. METHODS: A methodological study with secondary data of one hundred ninety-five women. The WHODAS score was analysed in different ways and associated with sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle, and health aspects. The Poisson regression was chosen with the final WHODAS score in four variations (continuous, dichotomous, polytomous, and quartiles), and the presence of chronic disease. RESULTS: The analysis showed statistical significance in the univariate analysis for the adjustment variables and all the variations of the disability variable. The distribution analysis of the prevalence ratio and the AIC evidenced that the WHODAS score as a continuous variable had the lower AIC and statistical significance, as well as the most significant area under the ROC curve. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the use of the continuous variable is the most indicated and that the categorization of the WHODAS score should be avoided.

show abstract

Development and prospective evaluation of CAPLET, a cancer ambulatory patient physical function longitudinal evaluation tool for routine clinical practice

Abstract: CAPLET improves the feasibility of capturing detailed assessments of patient-reported physical function in cancer outpatients.

Cited by 3 publications

References 32 publications

The use of patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer care: preliminary insights from a multinational scoping survey of oncology practitioners

The use of patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer care: preliminary insights from a multinational scoping survey of oncology practitioners

Self-reported MeasUrement of Physical and PsychosOcial Symptoms Response Tool (SUPPORT-dialysis): systematic symptom assessment and management in patients on in-centre haemodialysis – a parallel arm, non-randomised feasibility pilot study protocol

What is the most appropriate way to analyse the WHODAS 2.0 score?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About