Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/23885
Title: The use of patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer care: preliminary insights from a multinational scoping survey of oncology practitioners
Authors: Cheung, Yin Ting 
Chan, Alexandre 
Charalambous, Andreas 
Darling, H. S. 
Eng, Lawson 
Grech, Lisa 
Van Den Hurk, Corina J.G. 
Kirk, Deborah 
Mitchell, Sandra A. 
Poprawski, Dagmara 
Rammant, Elke 
Ramsey, Imogen 
Fitch, Margaret I. 
Chan, Raymond J. 
Major Field of Science: Medical and Health Sciences
Field Category: Clinical Medicine
Keywords: PRO;PROM;Patient-centered care;Patient-reported outcome measures;Patient-reported outcomes
Issue Date: 1-Feb-2022
Source: Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 1427-1439
Volume: 30
Issue: 2
Start page: 1427
End page: 1439
Journal: Supportive Care in Cancer 
Abstract: 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.
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/23885
ISSN: 14337339
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-06545-7
Rights: © The Author(s)
Type: Article
Affiliation : The Chinese University of Hong Kong 
University of California 
Cyprus University of Technology 
University of Turku 
Command Hospital Air Force 
University of Toronto 
Monash University 
University of Melbourne 
Swinburne University of Technology 
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre 
Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation 
Edith Cowan University 
National Cancer Institute 
King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre 
Ghent University 
University of South Australia 
Flinders University 
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα/Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
Cheung2022_Article_TheUseOfPatient-reportedOutcom.pdfFulltext737.23 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
CORE Recommender
Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

14
checked on Feb 2, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

7
Last Week
0
Last month
1
checked on Oct 29, 2023

Page view(s)

298
Last Week
0
Last month
3
checked on Nov 21, 2024

Download(s)

358
checked on Nov 21, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons