Patient-reported outcome measures for asthma:a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are measures of the outcome of treatment(s) reported directly by the patient or carer. There is increasing international policy interest in using these to assess the impact of clinical care. AIMS: To identify suitably validated PROMs for asthma and examine their potential for use in clinical settings. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases from 1990 onwards to identify PROMs for asthma. These were critically appraised, then narratively synthesised. We also identified the generic PROMs commonly used alongside asthma-specific PROMs. RESULTS: We identifi ed 68 PROMs for asthma, 13 of which were selected through screening as being adequately developed to warrant full-quality appraisal: 8 for adults, 4 for children and 1 for a child's caregiver. The PROMs found to be sufficiently well validated to offer promise for use in clinical settings were the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and mini-AQLQ for adults, and Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire for children. Rhinasthma was considered promising in simultaneously assessing the impact of asthma and rhinitis in those with coexistent disease. We identified 28 generic PROMs commonly used in conjunction with asthma-specific instruments. CONCLUSIONS: We identified asthma PROMs that offer the greatest potential for use in clinical settings. Further work is needed to assess whether these are fit-for-purpose for use in clinical practice with individual patients. In particular, there is a need to ensure these are validated for use in clinical settings, acceptable to patients, caregivers and clinicians, and yield meaningful outcomes. © 2014 Primary Care Respiratory Society/Macmillan Publishers Limited.

The Responsiveness, Content Validity, and Convergent Validity of the Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) Patient-Reported Outcome Measure

Objective Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) is a patient-centred questionnaire that allows cancer patients to identify and quantify the severity of their ‘Concerns’ and Wellbeing, as opposed to using a pre-determined list. MYCaW administration is brief and aids in prioritising treatment approaches. Our goal was to assess the convergent validity and responsiveness of MYCaW scores over time, the generalisability of the existing qualitative coding framework in different complementary and integrative healthcare settings and content validity. Methods Baseline and 6-week follow-up data (n=82) from MYCaW and FACIT-SpEx questionnaires were collected for a service evaluation of the ‘Living Well With The Impact of Cancer’ course at Penny Brohn Cancer Care. MYCaW construct validity was determined using Spearman's Rank Correlation test, and responsiveness indices assessed score changes over time. The existing qualitative coding framework was reviewed using a new dataset (n=158) and coverage of concern categories compared to items of existing outcome measures. Results Good correlation between MYCaW and FACIT-SpEx score changes were achieved (r= -0.57, p≥0.01). MYCaW Profile and Concern scores were highly responsive to change: SRM=1.02 and 1.08; effect size=1.26 and 1.22. MYCaW change scores showed the anticipated gradient of change according to clinically relevant degrees of change. Categories including ‘Spirituality’, ‘weight change’ and ‘practical concerns’ were added to the coding framework to improve generalisability. Conclusions MYCaW scores were highly responsive to change, allowing personalized patient outcomes to be quantified; the qualitative coding framework is generalisable across different oncology settings and has broader coverage of patient-identified concerns compared with existing cancer-related patient-reported outcome measures.

Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study protocol

Introduction Emerging evidence suggests that patient-reported outcome (PRO)-specific information may be omitted in trial protocols and that PRO results are poorly reported, limiting the use of PRO data to inform cancer care. This study aims to evaluate the standards of PRO-specific content in UK cancer trial protocols and their arising publications and to highlight examples of best-practice PRO protocol content and reporting where they occur. The objective of this study is to determine if these early findings are generalisable to UK cancer trials, and if so, how best we can bring about future improvements in clinical trials methodology to enhance the way PROs are assessed, managed and reported. Hypothesis: Trials in which the primary end point is based on a PRO will have more complete PRO protocol and publication components than trials in which PROs are secondary end points.

Methods and analysis Completed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio Cancer clinical trials (all cancer specialities/age-groups) will be included if they contain a primary/secondary PRO end point. The NIHR portfolio includes cancer trials, supported by a range of funders, adjudged as high-quality clinical research studies. The sample will be drawn from studies completed between 31 December 2000 and 1 March 2014 (n=1141) to allow sufficient time for completion of the final trial report and publication. Two reviewers will then review the protocols and arising publications of included trials to: (1) determine the completeness of their PRO-specific protocol content; (2) determine the proportion and completeness of PRO reporting in UK Cancer trials and (3) model factors associated with PRO protocol and reporting completeness and with PRO reporting proportion.

Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the ethics committee at University of Birmingham (ERN_15-0311). Trial findings will be disseminated via presentations at local, national and international conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media including the CPROR twitter account and UOB departmental website (http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/cpro0r).

Impact of depressive symptoms on subjective well-being: the importance of patient-reported outcomes in schizophrenia

Objective: The subjective experience of psychotic patients toward treatment is a key factor in medication adherence, quality of life, and clinical outcome. The aim of this study was to assess the subjective well-being in patients with schizophrenia and to examine its relationship with the presence and severity of depressive symptoms. Methods: A multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted with clinically stable outpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia. The Subjective Well-Being under Neuroleptic Scale - short version (SWN-K) and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) were used to gather information on well-being and the presence and severity of depressive symptoms, respectively. Spearman's rank correlation was used to assess the associations between the SWN-K total score, its five subscales, and the CDSS total score. Discriminative validity was evaluated against that criterion by analysing the area under the curve (AUC). Results: Ninety-seven patients were included in the study. Mean age was 35 years (standard deviation = 10) and 72% were male. Both the total SWN-K scale and its five subscales correlated inversely and significantly with the CDSS total score (P < 0.0001). The highest correlation was observed for the total SWN-K (Spearman's rank order correlation [ rho] = -0.59), being the other correlations: mental functioning (-0.47), social integration (-0.46), emotional regulation (-0.51), physical functioning (-0.48), and self-control (-0.41). A total of 33 patients (34%) were classified as depressed. Total SWN-K showed the highest AUC when discriminating between depressive severity levels (0.84), followed by emotional regulation (0.80), social integration (0.78), physical functioning and self-control (0.77), and mental functioning (0.73). Total SWN-K and its five subscales showed a significant linear trend against CDSS severity levels (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The presence of moderate to severe depressive symptoms was relatively high, and correlated inversely with patients' subjective well-being. Routine assessment of patient-reported measures in patients with schizophrenia might reduce potential discrepancy between patient and physician assessment, increase therapeutic alliance, and improve outcome.

Patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials on age-related macular degeneration

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the frequency and type of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for age-related macular degeneration (AMD).

METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic search between January 2010 and November 2013 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library (Central) and the clinical trials registries (http://www.controlled-trials.com and http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov) according to defined inclusion criteria (RCTs on AMD in English). Two independent reviewers evaluated studies for inclusion. One reviewer extracted data of included studies, and a second masked reviewer assessed 10% to confirm accuracy in data collection. Reference lists of included papers and appendices of relevant Cochrane systematic reviews were scanned to identify other relevant RCTs. Information collected on extracted outcomes was analysed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS: Literature and registry search yielded 3816 abstracts of journal articles and 493 records from trial registries. A total of 177 RCTs were deemed to have met inclusion criteria. Of the 858 outcomes reported, 38 outcomes were identified as PROMs (4.4%). Of the 177 RCTs examined, PROMs were used in 25 trials (14.1%). The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25 was the most frequently used PROM instrument (64% of RCTs with PROMs included).

CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights that a small proportion of AMD RCTs included PROMs as outcome measures and that there was a variety in the instruments used.

Patient-reported outcomes in borderline personality disorder.

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) refers to measures that emphasize the subjective view of patients about their health-related conditions and behaviors. Typically, PROs include self-report questionnaires and clinical interviews. Defining PROs for borderline personality disorder (BPD) is particularly challenging given the disorder's high symptomatic heterogeneity, high comorbidity with other psychiatric conditions, highly fluctuating symptoms, weak correlations between symptoms and functional outcomes, and lack of valid and reliable experimental measures to complement self-report data. Here, we provide an overview of currently used BPD outcome measures and discuss them from clinical, psychometric, experimental, and patient perspectives. In addition, we review the most promising leads to improve BPD PROs, including the DSM-5 Section III, the Recovery Approach, Ecological Momentary Assessments, and novel experimental measures of social functioning that are associated with functional and social outcomes.

Anti-VEGF treatment of patients with diabetic macular edema : Studies of visual acuity, macular edema and patient-reported outcomes

The aim of this thesis was to describe and evaluate visual acuity, macular edema and patientreported outcomes (PRO) following anti-VEGF treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME) patients in a real-world setting. Using a longitudinal study design, a cohort of DME patients was followed from baseline to 1 year after treatment start. Data were collected from two eye clinics at two county hospitals. Social background characteristics, medical data and PRO were measured before treatment initiation, at four month and after 1 year. A total of 57 patients completed the study. Mean age was 69 years and the sample was equally distributed regarding sex. At baseline, the patients described their general health as low. One year after treatment initiation, 30 patients had improved visual acuity and 27 patients had no improvement in visual acuity. The patients whose visual acuity improved reported an improvement in several subscales in patient-reported outcome measures (PROM), which was in contrast to the group that experienced a decline in visual acuity, where there was no improvement in PROM. Outcomes from the study can be useful for developing and providing relevant information and support to patients undergoing this treatment.

Patient-reported outcomes and visual acuity after 12 months of anti-VEGF-treatment for sight-threatening diabetic macular edema in a real world setting

Aims To examine objective visual acuity measured with ETDRS, retinal thickness (OCT), patient reported outcome and describe levels of glycated hemoglobin and its association with the effects on visual acuity in patients treated with anti-VEGF for visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema (DME) during 12 months in a real world setting. Methods In this cross-sectional study, 58 patients (29 females and 29 males; mean age, 68 years) with type 1 and type 2 diabetes diagnosed with DME were included. Medical data and two questionnaires were collected; an eye-specific (NEI VFQ-25) and a generic health-related quality of life questionnaire (SF-36) were used. Results The total patient group had significantly improved visual acuity and reduced retinal thickness at 4 months and remains at 12 months follow up. Thirty patients had significantly improved visual acuity, and 27 patients had no improved visual acuity at 12 months. The patients with improved visual acuity had significantly improved scores for NEI VFQ-25 subscales including general health, general vision, near activities, distance activities, and composite score, but no significant changes in scores were found in the group without improvements in visual acuity. Conclusions Our study revealed that anti-VEGF treatment improved visual acuity and central retinal thickness as well as patient-reported outcome in real world 12 months after treatment start.

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.

Establishing a population-based patient-reported outcomes study (PROMs) using national cancer registries across two jurisdictions: The Prostate Cancer Treatment, your experience (PiCTure) study

Objective: To establish an international patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) study among prostate cancer survivors, up to 18 years postdiagnosis, in two countries with different healthcare systems and ethical frameworks. Design: A cross-sectional, postal survey of prostate cancer survivors sampled and recruited via two population-based cancer registries. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) evaluated patients for eligibility to participate. Questionnaires contained validated instruments to assess health-related quality of life and psychological well-being, including QLQ-C30, QLQPR-25, EQ-5D-5L, 21-question Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) and the Decisional Regret Scale. Setting: Republic of Ireland (RoI) and Northern Ireland (NI). Primary outcome measures: Registration completeness, predictors of eligibility and response, data missingness, unweighted and weighted PROMs. Results: Prostate cancer registration was 80% (95% CI 75% to 84%) and 91% (95% CI 89% to 93%) complete 2 years postdiagnosis in NI and RoI, respectively. Of 12 322 survivors sampled from registries, 53% (n=6559) were classified as eligible following HCP screening. In the multivariate analysis, significant predictors of eligibility were: being ≤59 years of age at diagnosis (p<0.001), short-term survivor (<5 years postdiagnosis; p<0.001) and from RoI (p<0.001). 3348 completed the questionnaire, yielding a 54% adjusted response rate. 13% of men or their families called the study freephone with queries for assistance with questionnaire completion or to talk about their experience. Significant predictors of response in multivariate analysis were: being ≤59 years at diagnosis (p<0.001) and from RoI (p=0.016). Mean number of missing questions in validated instruments ranged from 0.12 (SD 0.71; EQ-5D-5L) to 3.72 (SD 6.30; QLQ-PR25). Weighted and unweighted mean EQ-5D-5L, QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25 scores were similar, as were the weighted and unweighted prevalences of depression, anxiety and distress. Conclusions: It was feasible to perform PROMs studies across jurisdictions, using cancer registries as sampling frames; we amassed one of the largest, international, population-based data set of prostate cancer survivors. We highlight improvements which could inform future PROMs studies, including utilising general practitioners to assess eligibility and providing a freephone service.

Consensus on the Need for a Hierarchical List of Patient-reported Pain Outcomes for Metaanalyses of Knee Osteoarthritis Trials: An OMERACT Objective.

OBJECTIVE Although protocol registration for systematic reviews is still not mandatory, reviewers should be strongly encouraged to register the protocol to identify the methodological approach, including all outcomes of interest. This will minimize the likelihood of biased decisions in reviews, such as selective outcome reporting. A group of international experts convened to address issues regarding the need to develop hierarchical lists of outcome measurement instruments for a particular outcome for metaanalyses. METHODS Multiple outcome measurement instruments exist to measure the same outcome. Metaanalysis of knee osteoarthritis (OA) trials, and the assessment of pain as an outcome, was used as an exemplar to assess how Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT), the Cochrane Collaboration, and other international initiatives might contribute in this area. The meeting began with formal presentations of background topics, empirical evidence from the literature, and a brief introduction to 2 existing hierarchical lists of pain outcome measurement instruments recommended for metaanalyses of knee OA trials. RESULTS After discussions, most participants agreed that there is a need to develop a methodology for generation of hierarchical lists of outcome measurement instruments to guide metaanalyses. Tools that could be used to steer development of such a prioritized list are the COSMIN checklist (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) and the OMERACT Filter 2.0. CONCLUSION We list meta-epidemiological research agenda items that address the frequency of reported outcomes in trials, as well as methodologies to assess the best measurement properties (i.e., truth, discrimination, and feasibility).

Life impact of ankle fractures : qualitative analysis of patient and clinician experiences

Background: Ankle fractures are one of the more commonly occurring forms of trauma managed by orthopaedic teams worldwide. The impacts of these injuries are not restricted to pain and disability caused at the time of the incident, but may also result in long term physical, psychological, and social consequences. There are currently no ankle fracture specific patient-reported outcome measures with a robust content foundation. This investigation aimed to develop a thematic conceptual framework of life impacts following ankle fracture from the experiences of people who have suffered ankle fractures as well as the health professionals who treat them. Methods: A qualitative investigation was undertaken using in-depth semi-structured interviews with people (n=12) who had previously sustained an ankle fracture (patients) and health professionals (n=6) that treat people with ankle fractures. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Each phrase was individually coded and grouped in categories and aligned under emerging themes by two independent researchers. Results: Saturation occurred after 10 in-depth patient interviews. Time since injury for patients ranged from 6 weeks to more than 2 years. Experience of health professionals ranged from 1 year to 16 years working with people with ankle fractures. Health professionals included an Orthopaedic surgeon (1), physiotherapists (3), a podiatrist (1) and an occupational therapist (1). The emerging framework derived from patient data included eight themes (Physical, Psychological, Daily Living, Social, Occupational and Domestic, Financial, Aesthetic and Medication Taking). Health professional responses did not reveal any additional themes, but tended to focus on physical and occupational themes. Conclusions: The nature of life impact following ankle fractures can extend beyond short term pain and discomfort into many areas of life. The findings from this research have provided an empirically derived framework from which a condition-specific patient-reported outcome measure can be developed.

Development and validation of the ankle fracture outcome of rehabilitation measure (A-FORM)

Study Design Delphi panel and cohort study. Objective To develop and refine a condition-specific, patient-reported outcome measure, the Ankle Fracture Outcome of Rehabilitation Measure (A-FORM), and to examine its psychometric properties, including factor structure, reliability, and validity, by assessing item fit with the Rasch model. Background To our knowledge, there is no patient-reported outcome measure specific to ankle fracture with a robust content foundation. Methods A 2-stage research design was implemented. First, a Delphi panel that included patients and health professionals developed the items and refined the item wording. Second, a cohort study (n = 45) with 2 assessment points was conducted to permit preliminary maximum-likelihood exploratory factor analysis and Rasch analysis. Results The Delphi panel reached consensus on 53 potential items that were carried forward to the cohort phase. From the 2 time points, 81 questionnaires were completed and analyzed; 38 potential items were eliminated on account of greater than 10% missing data, factor loadings, and uniqueness. The 15 unidimensional items retained in the scale demonstrated appropriate person and item reliability after (and before) removal of 1 item (anxious about footwear) that had a higher-than-ideal outfit statistic (1.75). The “anxious about footwear” item was retained in the instrument, but only the 14 items with acceptable infit and outfit statistics (range, 0.5–1.5) were included in the summary score. Conclusion This investigation developed and refined the A-FORM (Version 1.0). The A-FORM items demonstrated favorable psychometric properties and are suitable for conversion to a single summary score. Further studies utilizing the A-FORM instrument are warranted. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014;44(7):488–499. Epub 22 May 2014. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014.4980