Quantifying the effect email reminders have on patient reported outcome measure returns in a large prostate cancer registry

Papa, Nathan; Bensley, Jonathan G.; Hall, Katrina; Evans, Melanie; Millar, Jeremy

doi:10.1186/s41687-022-00426-1

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, ePROs were more popular compared to pPROs among responders, but that was not accompanied by a difference in response rates, either. Reminders, seemed to increase response, a finding in line with previous studies on oncologic patients 25 , 26 , but this effect was again not retained on logistic regression. Therefore, it may be so that familiarity and ease of implementation are not sufficient triggers for a response.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Effect of mode of delivery of patient reported outcomes in patients with breast disease: a randomised controlled trial

Pantiora,

Hedman,

Aristokleous

et al. 2023

International Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) have an integral role on how to improve patients’ overall experience. The optimal PROs delivery in patients with breast disease is an important issue since PROs are steadily integrated in routine care. Methods: An institutional phase 3 randomised controlled, open-label trial. Eligible candidates were adult women with perceived or confirmed breast disease. Computer generated randomisation was used to allocate interventions: collection of PROs in electronic or paper form. Our objective was the effectiveness of electronic versus paper form of PROs. The main outcome measures were: response rate, reported experience, administrative resources and carbon dioxide emissions. Results: 238 patients were randomised. After loss-to-follow-up and consent withdrawals, 218 participants (median age, iqr=55, 21; n=110 / n=108) were included in the per-intention-to-treat analysis. Response rate was 61.8% for electronic patient reported outcomes (ePROs) and 63.9% for paper patient reported outcomes (pPROs) (difference=−2.1%, 95% CI: -15.8%, 11.7%). Only known breast cancer at recruitment was predictive for response in multivariable analysis. ePROs were associated with 57% reduction in administrative time required, 95% reduction in incremental costs and 84% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, all differences being significant. No difference was detected in perception of PRO significance or ease of completion, but participants experienced that they needed less time to complete ePROs [median, (iqr) 10 (9) respectively 15(10)]. Finally, respondents would prefer ePROs over pPROs (difference 48.1%, 95%CI 32.8%, 63.4%). Conclusion: ePROs do not increase response rate in patients with perceived or confirmed breast disease. However, they can enhance patient experience, reduce incremental costs, facilitate administrative logistics and are more sustainable. On the basis of these findings, both modalities should continue to be available.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Effect of mode of delivery of patient reported outcomes in patients with breast disease: a randomised controlled trial

Pantiora,

Hedman,

Aristokleous

et al. 2023

International Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has already been undertaken by the Victorian registry since 2018, which has implemented a program to increase the response rate via email, including sending automated reminders. This has helped drive the PROMS completion rate to over 70% in this jurisdiction 23 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of binational radiation therapy quality indicator reports for prostate cancer treatment using registry data

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Quality indicators (QIs) are metrics which seek to allow comparison of clinicians' and institutes' practice to best evidence-based practice. The Australia and New Zealand Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry (PCOR-ANZ) is a bi-national clinical quality registry with coverage estimated to be over 60% of the men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer. We outline the production and ambition of institute-level QI reports to benchmark performance for radiation therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer. Methods: An expert clinician panel was assembled to create a list of candidate QIs based on a comprehensive literature review, and on modified Delphimethod and expert-consensus voting. A separate implementation group-including, clinicians, epidemiologists, data managers and data scientists-employed an evidence-and consensus-based approach to generate an effective QI report designed for automated production and regular distribution to participating institutes. Feedback from the recipient clinicians was sought to enable refinement of these reports. Results: Seven QIs, including three related to post-treatment symptoms, were deemed feasible to analyse with the currently available data. Utilising an existing report template employed for benchmarking of surgical indicators, a novel radiation therapy report was generated using registry data in a secure analytical environment. The first, beta version of these reports have been produced and confidentially distributed. It is planned to automatically generate these reports biannually and iteratively refine them based on the clinician input. Conclusion: QI reports for the treatment of prostate cancer by radiation oncologists have been produced using data from Australia and New Zealand patients. These are being disseminated to institutes on a six-monthly basis allowing comparisons to de-identified peers. The reports aim to facilitate improving patient outcomes, deepen engagement with the radiation oncology community and increase the breadth of PCOR-ANZ coverage. Additional QIs will be included in future iterations of these reports as data matures.

show abstract

How Prostate Cancer Patients are Surveyed may Influence Self-Reported Sexual Function Responses

Papa

Bensley

Perera

et al. 2022

The Journal of Sexual Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The side effects of prostate cancer treatment include decreases in sexual function, hence, the way patient reported outcomes are collected may affect the quantity and quality of responses. Aim To determine the effect that different survey modes (email, telephone, or mail) had on the quantity of missing data and self-reported function following treatment. Methods Men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer and enrolled in the Victorian Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry formed the study population. The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) survey instrument was administered approximately 1 year after their initial treatment. EPIC-26 measures self-reported function in the sexual, urinary, bowel, and hormonal domains. Multivariable regression models were used to examine effects of survey mode, adjusting for age, residence, socioeconomic status, diagnosing institute type, risk group and primary treatment modality. Outcomes The percentage of patients for whom a domain score could not be calculated due to missing responses and the functional score within each domain. Results Registry staff attempted to reach 8,586 men eligible to complete the EPIC-26. Of these, 4,301 (50%) returned the survey via email, 1,882 (22%) completed by telephone, and 197 (2.3%) by mail. 2,206 (26%) were uncontactable or did not respond. Email responders had the highest proportion answering all 26 questions (95% vs 87% by phone and 67% by mail). The sexual function score was unable to be calculated due to missing responses for 1.3% of email responders, 8.8% by phone, and 8.1% by mail. After adjustment for patient and disease factors, phone responders were almost 6 times more likely than email responders to have a missing score in this domain, odds ratio = 5.84 (95% confidence interval: 4.06–8.40). The adjusted mean functional score (out of 100) was higher for those responding by phone than email or mail across all domains. The largest adjusted difference between phone and email was observed in the hormonal domain (mean difference 4.5, 95% confidence interval: 3.5–5.4), exceeding the published minimally important difference for this score. Clinical Implications Studies that ask questions regarding sexual health and use multi-modal data collection methods should be aware that this potentially affects their data and consider adjusting for this factor in their analyses. Strengths and limitations A large study sample utilizing a widely available survey instrument. Patient specific reasons for non-response were not explored. Conclusion Completion mode effects should be considered when analyzing responses to sexual function questions in an older, male population.

show abstract

Quantifying the effect email reminders have on patient reported outcome measure returns in a large prostate cancer registry

Cited by 5 publications

References 17 publications

Effect of mode of delivery of patient reported outcomes in patients with breast disease: a randomised controlled trial

Effect of mode of delivery of patient reported outcomes in patients with breast disease: a randomised controlled trial

Development of binational radiation therapy quality indicator reports for prostate cancer treatment using registry data

How Prostate Cancer Patients are Surveyed may Influence Self-Reported Sexual Function Responses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About