The Development and Feasibility of a Novel Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (Eproms) Questionnaire in patients with penile cancer

被引:1
作者
Adegboye, Oluwatobi [1 ,2 ]
Churchill, James [2 ]
Moorjani, John [2 ]
Johnson, Helen [2 ]
Capper, Sharon [2 ]
Booker, Jane [2 ]
Parnham, Arie [2 ]
Lau, Maurice [2 ]
Sangar, Vijay [1 ,2 ]
Faivre-Finn, Corinne [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, Dept Med & Hlth, Manchester, England
[2] Christie NHS Fdn Trust, Dept Surg, Wilmslow Rd, Manchester M20 4BX, England
关键词
Electronic patient-reported outcomes measure; ePROMs; Feasibility; Patient-reported outcome measures; PROMs; Service evaluation; SURGERY; INDEX; CARE;
D O I
10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102168
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
This study reports the development and feasibility of a novel electronic patient-reported outcome measures questionnaire for patients with penile cancer. 220 adult males were sent questionnaires, and 141 (64%) responded initially. The mean dropout rate of subsequent questionnaires was 56%, displaying that over time patients struggled to maintain adherence and engagement. The questionnaire requires additional validation, research, and education. Background: Penile cancer (PeCa) is a rare cancer with surgical options that affect patients' quality-of-life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are uncommonly utilized in this cohort despite their several patient-centered benefits and there are recommendations to further digitalize PROMs. This prospective, population-based study aimed to report the development and feasibility of a novel electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) questionnaire for patients with PeCa. Materials and methods: A novel ePROMs questionnaire was developed and sent to patients 3 days before outpatient clinic appointments. The questionnaire included up to 30 items on patient symptomology and quality-of-life, including a self-reported quality-of-life score (rated 0 being worst and 100 being best). Data were collected for patients followed up between August 2021 and May 2022. The primary feasibility outcomes, adherence and engagement, were measured by response and drop-out rates. Differences in responders and nonresponders were also ascertained. Secondary outcomes explored the clinical utility of the questionnaire. Responders were subcategorized into 3 groups: circumcision (Ci), partial penectomy (PP) or total penectomy (TP) and differences were analyzed. This study was approved by the local Trust Governance Panel, including for ethical considerations. Results: 220 adult males were sent ePROMs questionnaires, and 141 (64%) responded initially. The mean dropout rate of subsequent questionnaires was 56%. The maximum number of questionnaires sent to and completed by a patient was 8 (n = 1). Nonresponders were older (P < .0001), with poorer performance status (P < .0001) and lower body mass index (P = .0288). TP patients reported the lowest median quality-of-life score 68.50 (8-99), followed by the Ci group (72.0, 37-94) and the PP group (76.0, 10-99). Conclusions: Patients initially engaged and adhered to the ePROMs questionnaire but struggled to maintain this over time. Clinical data gathered by the questionnaire may be utilized to inform patient care. The questionnaire requires additional validation, research, and education.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A novel method for expediting the development of patient-reported outcome measures and an evaluation of its performance via simulation
    Garrard, Lili
    Price, Larry R.
    Bott, Marjorie J.
    Gajewski, Byron J.
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2015, 15
  • [42] Patient involvement in the development of patient-reported outcome measures: The developers’ perspective
    Bianca Wiering
    Dolf de Boer
    Diana Delnoij
    BMC Health Services Research, 17
  • [43] A novel method for expediting the development of patient-reported outcome measures and an evaluation of its performance via simulation
    Lili Garrard
    Larry R. Price
    Marjorie J. Bott
    Byron J. Gajewski
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 15
  • [44] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Perspective
    Zura, Robert
    Steen, R. Grant
    ORTHOPEDICS, 2018, 41 (01) : 10 - 11
  • [45] Equivalence of electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome measures
    Niloufar Campbell
    Faraz Ali
    Andrew Y. Finlay
    Sam S. Salek
    Quality of Life Research, 2015, 24 : 1949 - 1961
  • [46] Equivalence of electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome measures
    Campbell, Niloufar
    Ali, Faraz
    Finlay, Andrew Y.
    Salek, Sam S.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2015, 24 (08) : 1949 - 1961
  • [47] Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of lung cancer: A systematic review
    Ben Bouazza, Youssef
    Chiairi, Ibrahim
    El Kharbouchi, Ouiam
    De Backer, Lesley
    Vanhoutte, Greetje
    Janssens, Annelies
    Van Meerbeeck, Jan P.
    LUNG CANCER, 2017, 113 : 140 - 151
  • [48] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Their Clinical Applications in Dermatology
    Snyder, Ashley M.
    Chen, Suephy C.
    Chren, Mary-Margaret
    Ferris, Laura K.
    Edwards, LaVar D.
    Swerlick, Robert A.
    Flint, Nicholas D.
    Cizik, Amy M.
    Hess, Rachel
    Kean, Jacob
    Secrest, Aaron M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL DERMATOLOGY, 2023, 24 (04) : 499 - 511
  • [49] Patient-reported outcome measures for allergy and asthma in children
    Soyiri, Ireneous N.
    Nwaru, Bright I.
    Sheikh, Aziz
    PEDIATRIC ALLERGY AND IMMUNOLOGY, 2016, 27 (08) : 779 - 783
  • [50] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Routine Hematology Cancer Care
    Kirkpatrick, Suriya
    Campbell, Karen
    Harding, Samantha
    Rudd, Sarah
    CANCER NURSING, 2024,