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 Apr;25(2):176-179.
doi: 10.3747/co.25.3995. Epub 2018 Apr 30.

Measuring patient-reported outcomes to improve cancer care in Canada: an analysis of provincial survey data

Affiliations

Measuring patient-reported outcomes to improve cancer care in Canada: an analysis of provincial survey data

K Tran et al. Curr Oncol. 2018 Apr.

Abstract

Patient-reported outcomes measures (proms) are an important component of the shift from disease-centred to person-centred care. In oncology, proms describe the effects of cancer and its treatment from the patient perspective and ideally enable patients to communicate to their providers the physical symptoms and psychosocial concerns that are most relevant to them. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (esas-r) is a commonly used and validated tool in Canada to assess symptoms related to cancer. Here, we describe the extent to which patient-reported outcome programs have been implemented in Canada and the severity of symptoms causing distress for patients with cancer. As of April 2017, 8 of 10 provinces had implemented the esas-r to assess patient-reported outcomes. Data capture methods, the proportion of cancer treatment sites that have implemented the esas-r, and the time and frequency of screening vary from province to province. From October 2016 to March 2017 in the 8 reporting provinces, 88.0% of cancer patients were screened for symptoms. Of patients who reported having symptoms, 44.3% reported depression, with 15.5% reporting moderate-to-high levels; 50.0% reported pain, with 18.6% reporting moderate-to-high levels; 56.2% reported anxiety, with 20.4% reporting moderate-to-high levels; and 75.1% reported fatigue, with 34.4% reporting moderate-to-high levels. There are some notable areas in which the implementation of proms could be improved in Canada. Findings point to a need to increase the number of cancer treatment sites that screen all patients for symptoms; to standardize when and how frequently patients are screened across the country; to screen patients for symptoms during all phases of their cancer journey, not just during treatment; and to assess whether giving cancer care providers real-time patient-reported outcomes data has led to appropriate interventions that reduce the symptom burden and improve patient outcomes. Continued measurement and reporting at the system level will allow for a better understanding of progress in proms activity over time and of the areas in which targeted quality improvement efforts could ensure that patient symptoms and concerns are being addressed.

Keywords: Patient-reported outcomes; treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Severity of symptoms causing distress, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador combined, October 2016 to March 2017. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (revised version) asks patients to describe how they are feeling on a scale of 0–10. No distress = score of 0; low = scores of 1–3; moderate = scores of 4–6; high = scores of 7–10. Each symptom had a small number of missing responses that were excluded (pain, 0.4%; fatigue, 0.4%; anxiety, 0.5%; depression, 0.5%). Data source: Patient-Reported Outcome Initiative partners.

References

    1. Chen J, Ou L, Hollis SJ. A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:211. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-211. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Howell D, Molloy S, Wilkinson K, et al. Patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer clinical practice: a scoping review of use, impact on health outcomes, and implementation factors. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:1846–58. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv181. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Etkind SN, Daveson BA, Kwok W, et al. Capture, transfer, and feedback of patient-centered outcomes data in palliative care populations: does it make a difference? A systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015;49:611–24. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2014.07.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kotronoulas G, Kearney N, Maguire R, et al. What is the value of the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures toward improvement of patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes in cancer care? A systematic review of controlled trials. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1480–501. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.53.5948. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, et al. Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:557–65. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0830. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources