Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jan 5;16(1):6.
doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0823-5.

Proxy and patient reports of health-related quality of life in a national cancer survey

Affiliations

Proxy and patient reports of health-related quality of life in a national cancer survey

Jessica K Roydhouse et al. Health Qual Life Outcomes. .

Abstract

Background: Proxy respondents are frequently used in surveys, including those assessing health-related quality of life (HRQOL). In cancer, most research involving proxies has been undertaken with paired proxy-patient populations, where proxy responses are compared to patient responses for the same individual. In these populations, proxy-patient differences are small and suggest proxy underestimation of patient HRQOL. In practice, however, proxy responses will only be used when patient responses are not available. The difference between proxy and patient reports of patient HRQOL where patients are not able to report for themselves in cancer is not known. The objective of this study was to evaluate the difference between patient and proxy reports of patient HRQOL in a large national cancer survey, and determine if this difference could be mitigated by adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic information about patients.

Methods: Data were from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study. Patients or their proxies were recruited within 3-6 months of diagnosis with lung or colorectal cancer. HRQOL was measured using the SF-12 mental and physical composite scales. Differences of ½ SD (=5 points) were considered clinically significant. The primary independent variable was proxy status. Linear regression models were used to adjust for patient sociodemographic and clinical covariates, including cancer stage, patient age and education, and patient co-morbidities.

Results: Of 6471 respondents, 1011 (16%) were proxies. Before adjustment, average proxy-reported scores were lower for both physical (-6.7 points, 95% CI -7.4 to -5.9) and mental (-6 points, 95% CI -6.7 to -5.2) health. Proxy-reported scores remained lower after adjustment (physical: -5.8 points, -6.6 to -5; mental: -5.8 points, -6.6 to 5). Proxy-patient score differences remained clinically and statistically significant, even after adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical variables.

Conclusions: Proxy-reported outcome scores for both physical and mental health were clinically and significantly lower than patient-reported scores for these outcomes. The size of the proxy-patient score differences was not affected by the health domain, and adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical variables had minimal impact.

Keywords: Cancer; Mental health; Patient-reported outcomes; Physical health; Proxy-reported outcomes; Survey.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The CanCORS study was approved by institutional review boards at all participating institutions. Informed consent was obtained from all participants; at two sites, written consent was obtained and verbal consent was obtained from participants at other sites.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study Sample Selection Flow Diagram

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: HOS and the Medicare Star Ratings [http://www.hosonline.org/en/hos-and-the-star-ratings/]. Accessed 17 Mar 2016.
    1. Strong LE. The past, present, and future of patient-reported outcomes in oncology. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2015:e616–20. 10.14694/EdBook_AM.2015.35.e616. - PubMed
    1. Basch E. New frontiers in patient-reported outcomes: adverse event reporting, comparative effectiveness, and quality assessment. Annu Rev Med. 2014;65:307–317. doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-010713-141500. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Basch E, Snyder C, McNiff K, Brown R, Maddux S, Smith ML, Atkinson TM, Howell D, Chiang A, Wood W, et al. Patient-reported outcome performance measures in oncology. J Oncol Pract. 2014;10:209–211. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2014.001423. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roydhouse JK, Wilson IB. Systematic review of caregiver responses for patient health-related quality of life in adult cancer care. Qual Life Res. 2017;26:1925–1954. doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1540-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources