Review : "Quality of life: the assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes (2nd Ed.)" by Peter M. Fayers & David Machin

An updated version, this excellent text is a timely addition to the library of any nurse researching in oncology or other settings where individuals’ quality of life must be understood. Health-related quality of life should be a central aspect of studies concerned with health and illness. Indeed, considerable evidence has recently emerged in oncology and other research settings that selfreported quality of life is of great prognostic significance and may be the most reliable predictor of subsequent morbidity and mortality. From a nursing perspective, it is also gratifying to note that novel therapy and other oncology studies increasingly recognize the importance of understanding patients’ subjective experiences of an intervention over time and to ascertain whether patients perceive that a new intervention makes a difference to their quality of life and treatment outcomes. Measurements of quality of life are now routine in clinical trials of chemotherapy drugs and are often considered the prime outcome of interest in the cost/benefit analyses of these treatments. The authors have extensive experience in qualityof- life assessment in cancer clinical trials, where most of the pioneering work into quality of life has been conducted. That said, many of the health-related qualityof- life issues discussed are common to many illnesses, and researchers outside of cancer should find the book equally helpful.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome instruments of dermatologic adverse events associated with targeted cancer therapies

Purpose Dermatologic adverse events (dAEs) in cancer treatment are frequent with the use of targeted therapies. These dAEs have been shown to have significant impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). While standardized assessment tools have been developed for physicians to assess severity of dAEs, there is a discord between objective and subjective measures. The identification of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments useful in the context of targeted cancer therapies is therefore important in both the clinical and research settings for the overall evaluation of dAEs and their impact on HRQoL. Methods A comprehensive, systematic literature search of published articles was conducted by two independent reviewers in order to identify PRO instruments previously utilized in patient populations with dAEs from targeted cancer therapies. The identified PRO instruments were studied to determine which HRQoL issues relevant to dAEs were addressed, as well as the process of development and validation of these instruments. Results Thirteen articles identifying six PRO instruments met the inclusion criteria. Four instruments were general dermatology (Skindex-16©, Skindex-29©, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and DIELH-24) and two were symptom-specific (functional assessment of cancer therapy-epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-18 (FACT-EGFRI-18) and hand-foot syndrome-14 (HFS-14)). Conclusions While there are several PRO instruments that have been tested in the context of targeted cancer therapy, additional work is needed to develop new instruments and to further validate the instruments identified in this study in patients receiving targeted therapies.

Use of condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials among patients with wrist osteoarthritis : a systematic review

Background. This paper aimed to identify condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical trials among people with wrist osteoarthritis and summarise empirical peer-reviewed evidence supporting their reliability, validity, and responsiveness to change. Methods. A systematic review of randomised controlled trials among people with wrist osteoarthritis was undertaken. Studies reporting reliability, validity, or responsiveness were identified using a systematic reverse citation trail audit procedure. Psychometric properties of the instruments were examined against predefined criteria and summarised. Results. Thirteen clinical trials met inclusion criteria. The most common patient-reported outcome was the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (DASH). The DASH, the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ), the Patient Evaluation Measure (PEM), and the Patient-Reported Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) had evidence supporting their reliability, validity, and responsiveness. A post-hoc review of excluded studies revealed the AUSCAN Osteoarthritis Hand Index as another suitable instrument that had favourable reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Conclusions. The DASH, MHQ, and AUSCAN Osteoarthritis Hand Index instruments were supported by the most favourable empirical evidence for validity, reliability, and responsiveness. The PEM and PRWE also had favourable empirical evidence reported for these elements. Further psychometric testing of these instruments among people with wrist osteoarthritis is warranted.

Patient expectations, outcomes and satisfaction : related, relevant or redundant?

Abstract Study design: A prospective investigation of patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. Objective: Is there a correlation between patient’s expectations before lumbar surgery, postoperative outcomes and satisfaction levels? Methods: A prospective study of 145 patients undergoing primary, single-level surgery for degenerative lumbar conditions was conducted. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back visual analogue scale (VAS) and leg VAS were assessed pre-operatively and at 6 weeks and 6 months post-surgery. Patients’ expectations were measured pre-operatively by asking them to score the level of pain and disability that would be least acceptable for them to undergo surgery and be satisfied. Satisfaction was assessed six weeks post-operatively with a Likert scale. Differences in patient expectations between actual and expected improvements were quantified. Results: Most patients had a clinically relevant improvement, but only about half achieved their expectation. Satisfaction did not correlate with pre-operative pain or disability, or with patient expectation of improvement. Instead, satisfaction correlated with positive outcomes. Conclusions Patient expectations have little bearing on final outcome and satisfaction.

Patient reported adherence to hypertension treatment: A revalidation study

Background Adherence to hypertension management in patients with hypertension is known to influence their blood pressure control. It is important to measure patients’ adherence behaviours to assist with designing appropriate interventions to improve blood pressure control. Aims The purposes of this study were to use confirmatory factor analysis to revalidate the Therapeutic Adherence Scale for Hypertensive Patients (TASHP), and to calculate the cut-off score for classifying adherence behaviours into two groups: satisfactory and low adherence behaviours. Methods Systematic random sampling was used to recruit patients with hypertension in China. Demographic characteristics, the TASHP and blood pressure were collected. The psychometric tests of the TASHP included: construct validity, criteria-related validity, internal reliability, and split-half reliability. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve and Youden index were used to identify the cut-off score of the TASHP for blood pressure control. Results This study involved 366 patients. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the four-component structure of the TASHP proposed in the original scale development study. The TASHP has a satisfactory internal reliability (Cronbach’s α > 0.7) and a satisfactory split-half reliability (Spearman–Brown coefficients > 0.7). The patients with overall scores of the TASHP ⩾ 109 points were considered to have satisfactory adherence behaviours. Conclusion The TASHP is a validated and reliable instrument to measure the adherence to hypertension management in Chinese patients with hypertension. The cut-off score of 109 points can be considered as an effective measure to classify the level of adherence into satisfactory and low adherence behaviours.

Comparison of treatment effect sizes associated with surrogate and final patient relevant outcomes in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study

Objective To quantify and compare the treatment effect and risk of bias of trials reporting biomarkers or intermediate outcomes (surrogate outcomes) versus trials using final patient relevant primary outcomes. Design Meta-epidemiological study. Data sources All randomised clinical trials published in 2005 and 2006 in six high impact medical journals: Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ, Journal of the American Medical Association, Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, and PLoS Medicine. Study selection Two independent reviewers selected trials. Data extraction Trial characteristics, risk of bias, and outcomes were recorded according to a predefined form. Two reviewers independently checked data extraction. The ratio of odds ratios was used to quantify the degree of difference in treatment effects between the trials using surrogate outcomes and those using patient relevant outcomes, also adjusted for trial characteristics. A ratio of odds ratios >1.0 implies that trials with surrogate outcomes report larger intervention effects than trials with patient relevant outcomes. Results 84 trials using surrogate outcomes and 101 using patient relevant outcomes were considered for analyses. Study characteristics of trials using surrogate outcomes and those using patient relevant outcomes were well balanced, except for median sample size (371 v 741) and single centre status (23% v 9%). Their risk of bias did not differ. Primary analysis showed trials reporting surrogate endpoints to have larger treatment effects (odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.60) than trials reporting patient relevant outcomes (0.76, 0.70 to 0.82), with an unadjusted ratio of odds ratios of 1.47 (1.07 to 2.01) and adjusted ratio of odds ratios of 1.46 (1.05 to 2.04). This result was consistent across sensitivity and secondary analyses. Conclusions Trials reporting surrogate primary outcomes are more likely to report larger treatment effects than trials reporting final patient relevant primary outcomes. This finding was not explained by differences in the risk of bias or characteristics of the two groups of trials.

Reference bias : presentation of extreme health states prior to EQ-VAS improves health-related quality of life scores. A randomised crossover trial.

Background: Clinical practice and clinical research has made a concerted effort to move beyond the use of clinical indicators alone and embrace patient focused care through the use of patient reported outcomes such as healthrelated quality of life. However, unless patients give consistent consideration to the health states that give meaning to measurement scales used to evaluate these constructs, longitudinal comparison of these measures may be invalid. This study aimed to investigate whether patients give consideration to a standard health state rating scale (EQ-VAS) and whether consideration of good and poor health state descriptors immediately changes their selfreport. Methods: A randomised crossover trial was implemented amongst hospitalised older adults (n = 151). Patients were asked to consider descriptions of extremely good (Description-A) and poor (Description-B) health states. The EQ-VAS was administered as a self-report at baseline, after the first descriptors (A or B), then again after the remaining descriptors (B or A respectively). At baseline patients were also asked if they had considered either EQVAS anchors. Results: Overall 106/151 (70%) participants changed their self-evaluation by ≥5 points on the 100 point VAS, with a mean (SD) change of +4.5 (12) points (p < 0.001). A total of 74/151 (49%) participants did not consider the best health VAS anchor, of the 77 who did 59 (77%) thought the good health descriptors were more extreme (better) then they had previously considered. Similarly 85/151 (66%) participants did not consider the worst health anchor of the 66 who did 63 (95%) thought the poor health descriptors were more extreme (worse) then they had previously considered. Conclusions: Health state self-reports may not be well considered. An immediate significant shift in response can be elicited by exposure to a mere description of an extreme health state despite no actual change in underlying health state occurring. Caution should be exercised in research and clinical settings when interpreting subjective patient reported outcomes that are dependent on brief anchors for meaning. Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (#ACTRN12607000606482) http://www.anzctr. org.au

Response shift, recall bias and their effect on measuring change in health-related quality of life amongst older hospital patients

Background: Assessments of change in subjective patient reported outcomes such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are a key component of many clinical and research evaluations. However, conventional longitudinal evaluation of change may not agree with patient perceived change if patients' understanding of the subjective construct under evaluation changes over time (response shift) or if patients' have inaccurate recollection (recall bias). This study examined whether older adults' perception of change is in agreement with conventional longitudinal evaluation of change in their HRQoL over the duration of their hospital stay. It also investigated this level of agreement after adjusting patient perceived change for recall bias that patients may have experienced. Methods: A prospective longitudinal cohort design nested within a larger randomised controlled trial was implemented. 103 hospitalised older adults participated in this investigation at a tertiary hospital facility. The EQ-5D utility and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores were used to evaluate HRQoL. Participants completed EQ-5D reports as soon as they were medically stable (within three days of admission) then again immediately prior to discharge. Three methods of change score calculation were used (conventional change, patient perceived change and patient perceived change adjusted for recall bias). Agreement was primarily investigated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and limits of agreement. Results: Overall 101 (98%) participants completed both admission and discharge assessments. The mean (SD) age was 73.3 (11.2). The median (IQR) length of stay was 38 (20-60) days. For agreement between conventional longitudinal change and patient perceived change: ICCs were 0.34 and 0.40 for EQ-5D utility and VAS respectively. For agreement between conventional longitudinal change and patient perceived change adjusted for recall bias: ICCs were 0.98 and 0.90 respectively. Discrepancy between conventional longitudinal change and patient perceived change was considered clinically meaningful for 84 (83.2%) of participants, after adjusting for recall bias this reduced to 8 (7.9%). Conclusions: Agreement between conventional change and patient perceived change was not strong. A large proportion of this disagreement could be attributed to recall bias. To overcome the invalidating effect of response shift (on conventional change) and recall bias (on patient perceived change) a method of adjusting patient perceived change for recall bias has been described.

Assessment bias : physical activity questionnaire assessment inadvertently influences patients’ desire to be ‘more physically active’

Evaluating physical activity is important for public health population research and evaluating lifestyle interventions among targeted groups. Self-reported questionnaires are frequently used to evaluate physical activity in a variety of contexts where resource or pragmatic limitations prohibit the use of more sophisticated approaches. However, prior research in the use of other patient reported outcomes in healthcare settings has highlighted that simply completing a questionnaire may change a patients’ behaviour or responses to subsequent questions. This methodology study aimed to examine whether completing a standard physical activity questionnaire altered patients responses to two related questions a) whether they are ‘sufficiently physically active’ and b) whether they desire ‘to be more physically active.’

Birth control : to what extent do women report being informed and involved in decisions about pregnancy and birth procedures?

Background: Health policy, guidelines, and standards advocate giving patients comprehensive information and facilitating their involvement in health-related decision-making. Routine assessment of patient reports of these processes is needed. Our objective was to examine decision-making processes, specifically information provision and consumer involvement in decision-making, for nine pregnancy, labour, and birth procedures, as reported by maternity care consumers in Queensland, Australia. Methods: Participants were women who had a live birth in Queensland in a specified time period and were not found to have had a baby that died since birth, who completed the extended Having a Baby in Queensland Survey, 2010 about their maternity care experiences, and who reported at least one of the nine procedures of interest. For each procedure, women answered two questions that measured perceived (i) receipt of information about the benefits and risks of the procedure and (ii) role in decision-making about the procedure. Results: In all, 3,542 eligible women (34.2%) completed the survey. Between 4% (for pre-labour caesarean section) and 60% (for vaginal examination) of women reported not being informed of the benefits and risks of the procedure they experienced. Between 2% (epidural) and 34% (episiotomy) of women reported being unconsulted in decision-making. Over one quarter (26%) of the women who experienced episiotomy reported being neither informed nor consulted. Conclusions: There is an urgent need for interventions that facilitate information provision and consumer involvement in decision-making about several perinatal procedures, especially those performed within the time-limited intrapartum care episode.

Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations

Purpose The LUX-Lung 3 study investigated the efficacy of chemotherapy compared with afatinib, a selective, orally bioavailable ErbB family blocker that irreversibly blocks signaling from epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR/ErbB1), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/ErbB2), and ErbB4 and has wide-spectrum preclinical activity against EGFR mutations. A phase II study of afatinib in EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma demonstrated high response rates and progression-free survival (PFS). Patients and Methods In this phase III study, eligible patients with stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinoma were screened for EGFR mutations. Mutation-positive patients were stratified by mutation type (exon 19 deletion, L858R, or other) and race (Asian or non-Asian) before two-to-one random assignment to 40 mg afatinib per day or up to six cycles of cisplatin plus pemetrexed chemotherapy at standard doses every 21 days. The primary end point was PFS by independent review. Secondary end points included tumor response, overall survival, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Results A total of 1,269 patients were screened, and 345 were randomly assigned to treatment. Median PFS was 11.1 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.78; P = .001). Median PFS among those with exon 19 deletions and L858R EGFR mutations (n = 308) was 13.6 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.65; P = .001). The most common treatmentrelated adverse events were diarrhea, rash/acne, and stomatitis for afatinib and nausea, fatigue, and decreased appetite for chemotherapy. PROs favored afatinib, with better control of cough, dyspnea, and pain. Conclusion Afatinib is associated with prolongation of PFS when compared with standard doublet chemotherapy in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and EGFR mutations.

Thoracoscopic scoliosis surgery – a cheaper option? A cost analysis of 189 consecutive cases

INTRODUCTION: Increasing health care costs, limited resources and increased demand makes cost effective and cost-efficient delivery of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) management paramount. Rising implant costs in deformity correction surgery have prompted analysis of whether high implant densities are justified. The objective of this study was to analyse the costs of thoracoscopic scoliosis surgery, comparing initial learning curve costs with those of the established technique and to the costs involved in posterior instrumented fusion from the literature. METHODS: 189 consecutive cases from April 2000 to July 2011 were assessed with a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Information was gathered from a prospective database covering perioperative factors, clinical and radiological outcomes, complications and patient reported outcomes. The patients were divided into three groups to allow comparison; 1. A learning curve cohort, 2. An intermediate cohort and 3. A third cohort of patients, using our established technique. Hospital finance records and implant manufacturer figures were corrected to 2013 costs. A literature review of AIS management costs and implant density in similar curve types was performed. RESULTS: The mean pre-op Cobb angle was 53°(95%CI 0.4) and was corrected postop to mean 22.9°(CI 0.4). The overall complication rate was 20.6%, primarily in the first cohort, with a rate of 5.6% in the third cohort. The average total costs were $46,732, operating room costs of $10,301 (22.0%) and ICU costs of $4620 (9.8%). The mean number of screws placed was 7.1 (CI 0.04) with a single rod used for each case giving average implant costs of $14,004 (29.9%). Comparison of the three groups revealed higher implant costs as the technique evolved to that in use today, from $13,049 in Group 1 to $14577 in Group 3 (P<0.001). Conversely operating room costs reduced from $10,621 in Group 1 to $7573 (P<0.001) in Group 3. ICU stay was reduced from an average of 1.2 to 0 days. In-patient stay was significantly (P=0.006) lower in Groups 2 and 3 (5.4 days) than Group 1 (5.9 days) (i.e. a reduction in cost of approximately $6,140). CONCLUSIONS: The evolution of our thoracoscopic anterior scoliosis correction has resulted in an increase in the number of levels fused and reduction in complication rate. Implant costs have risen as a result, however, there has been a concurrent decrease in those costs generated by operating room use, ICU and in-patient stay with increasing experience. Literature review of equivalent curve types treated posteriorly shows similar perioperative factors but higher implant density, 69-83% compared to the 50% in this study. Thoracoscopic Scoliosis surgery presents a low density, reliable, efficient and effective option for selected curves. A cost analysis of Thoracoscopic Scoliosis Surgery using financial records and a prospectively collected database of all patients since 2000, demonstrating a clear cost advantage compared to equivalent posterior instrumentation and fusion.

Women's perceptions of communication in pregnancy and childbirth: Influences on participation and satisfaction with care

In this study, 3531 Queensland women, who had recently given birth, completed a questionnaire that included questions about their participation in decision making during pregnancy, their ratings of client centred care and perceived quality of care. These data tested a version of Street’s (2001) linguistic model of patient participation in care (LMOPPC), adapted to the maternity context. We investigated how age and education influenced women’s perceptions of their participation and quality of care. Hierarchical multiple regressions revealed that women’s perceived ability to make decisions, and the extent of client-centred communication with maternity care providers were the most influential predictors of participation and perceived quality of care. Participation in care predicted perceived quality of care, but the influence of client-centred communication by a care provider and a woman’s confidence in decision making were stronger predictors of perceived quality of care. Age and education level were not important predictors. These findings extend and support the use of LMOPPC in the maternity context.