The postoperative symptom burden in patients with lung cancer is severe and adversely impairs their quality of life. Symptom management is the cornerstone of medical care. Patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based symptom management is being increasingly recognized as the best "patient-centered care" model in clinical practice. However, the precise implementation of this model in patients undergoing lung cancer surgery is hindered by the lack of a lung cancer surgery-specific scale, implementation standards, clinical application parameters and high-quality researches. The use of a precise and simple PRO scale and an electronic PRO platform may greatly improve the feasibility of implementing this model. Currently, the application of PRO-based symptom management in lung cancer surgery is still being explored and needs to be improved in clinical research and practice.
ObjectiveTo summarize the applied research status on the evaluation tools of patient-reported outcome at home and abroad in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). MethodBy searching and analyzing the literatures, this paper summarized the concept, evaluation tools and application status of patient-reported outcome in the field of VTE. ResultsThe patient-reported outcomes can more comprehensively and accurately evaluate the disease burden and treatment effect of patients with venous thromboembolism, and can help doctors better understand patients' needs and guide individualized treatment and rehabilitation plans. ConclusionsPatient-reported outcome has a broad application prospect in the field of venous thromboembolism. Further promotion and application of patient-reported outcome can promote the development of medical research and provide reference guidelines for improving the management of patients with venous thromboembolism.
The COSMIN-RoB checklist includes three sections with a total of 10 boxes, which is used to evaluate risk of bias of studies on content validity, internal structure, and other measurement properties. COSMIN classifies reliability, measurement error, criteria validity, hypothesis testing for construct validity, and responsiveness as other measurement properties, which primarily focus on the quality of the (sub)scale as a whole, rather than on the item level. Among the five measurement properties, reliability, measurement error and criteria validity are the most widely used in the studies. Therefore, this paper aims to interpret COSMIN-RoB checklist with examples to guide researchers to evaluate the risk of bias of the studies on reliability, measurement error and criteria validity of PROMs.
ObjectiveTo categorize and describe stroke-patients based on factors related to patient reported outcomes. MethodsA questionnaire survey was conducted among stroke-patients in nine hospitals and communities in Shanxi Province. The general information questionnaire and stroke-patient reported outcome manual (Stroke-PROM) were completed. Latent profile analysis was used to analyze the scores of Stroke-PROM, and the explicit variables of the model were the final scores of each dimension. ANOVA and correlation analysis were used to measure the correlation between the factors and subtypes. ResultsFour unique stroke-patient profiles emerged, including a low physiological and low social group (9%), a high physiological and middle social group (40%), a middle physiological and middle social group (26%), and a middle physiological and high social group (25%). There were significant differences in scores of four areas among patients with different subtypes (P<0.05). Moreover, there was a correlation between age, payment, exercise and subtypes (P<0.05). ConclusionThere are obvious grouping characteristics for stroke patients. It is necessary to focus on stroke patients who are advanced in age, have a self-funded status and lack exercise, and provide targeted nursing measures to improve their quality of life.
ObjectiveTo compare the differences in patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life after total mastectomy and breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. MethodsBreast cancer patients who underwent surgical treatment in the First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University and The People’s Hospital of Shanxi Province from March to June 2021 were selected as the research objects by convenient sampling method. Self-designed questionnaires were used to evaluate the general situation of the patients. Patients’ satisfaction and quality of life were investigated by using the postoperative scale of the BREAST-Q module of total mastectomy (to investigate patients after total mastectomy) and the postoperative scale of the breast-conserving plastic surgery module (to investigate patients after breast-conserving surgery), and the patient-reported outcomes of total mastectomy and breast-conserving surgery were compared, including breast satisfaction, psychosocial health, chest and upper limb physical health, sexual health, medical team satisfaction, and information satisfaction. ResultsIn this study, there were 100 patients in the total mastectomy group and 50 patients in the breast conserving group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in marital status, monthly family income, education, body mass index, whether combined with other physical diseases, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, axillary lymph node dissection, tumor stage, and molecular typing (P>0.05). The rates of radiotherapy and endocrine therapy in the breast conserving group were higher than those in total mastectomy group ( χ2=48.701, P<0.001; χ2=15.891, P<0.001). The scores of quality of life and patient satisfaction scores of the breast conserving group including breast satisfaction, satisfactions of breast doctors, nurses and other doctors, social and mental health, sexual health score were higher than those of the total mastectomy group (P<0.001), but there was no significant difference in the physical health of chest and upper limbs score between the two groups (P>0.05). In addition, the satisfaction score of radiotherapy information in the breast conserving group was 69.40±20.44 and that of medical information given by breast surgeons was 87.04±19.46. ConclusionScores of breast satisfaction, psychosocial health, sexual health, and health-related quality of life in breast-conserving patients are higher than those in total mastectomy patients.
The estimation of the minimal important difference (MID) in patient-reported outcomes (PRO) relies on various selection principles and statistical methods, resulting in varying degrees of credibility among studies. When applying these findings, it is crucial to consider their evaluation outcomes. In the context of widely accepted MID studies based on the anchoring method, the credibility of the MID of PRO is influenced by the selection of anchors and the statistical methods employed for estimation. Variations in the anchors utilized, differences in clinical trial designs, disparities in the characteristics of measurement subjects and environment, as well as the control of biases in studies, can all contribute to inconsistencies in the MID of PRO. In response to this, McMaster University in Canada has developed a credibility evaluation tool specifically for MID studies in PRO. The tool comprises five core items and four additional items. The five core items encompass an evaluation framework that assesses: (1) Is the patient or necessary proxy responding directly to both the PRO and the anchor? (2) Is the anchor easily understandable and relevant for patients or necessary proxy? (3)Has the anchor shown good correlation with the PRO? (4) Is the MID precise? (5) Does the threshold or difference between groups on the anchor used to estimate the MID reflect a small but important difference? The four additional items concerning transition-rated anchors assess: (1) Is the amount of elapsed time between baseline and follow-up measurement for MID estimation optimal? (2) Does the transition item have a satisfactory correlation with the PRO score at follow-up? (3) Does the transition item correlate with the PRO score at baseline? (4) Is the correlation of the transition item with the PRO change score appreciably greater than the correlation of the transition item with the PRO score at follow-up? Given the relative weights of each item in the tool are uncertain and environment-dependent, items are not scored; instead, an overall judgment is made using a qualitative rating approach. This article introduces the specific items of this tool and illustrates the evaluation process through a case study to improve its use in optimizing PRO results presentation and interpretation in clinical trials, reviews, assessments, and guidelines.
Measurement properties studies of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) aims to validate the measurement properties of PROMs. In the process of designing and statistical analysis of these measurement properties studies, bias will occur if there are any defects, which will affect the quality of PROMs. Therefore, the COSMIN (consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments) team has developed the COSMIN risk of bias (COSMIN-RoB) checklist to evaluate risk of bias of studies on measurement properties of PROMs. The checklist can be used to develop systematic reviews of PROMs measurement properties, and for PROMs developers, it can also be used to guide the research design in the measurement tool development process for reducing bias. At present, similar assessment tools are lacking in China. Therefore, this article aims to introduce the primary contents of COSMIN-RoB checklist and to interpret how to evaluate risk of bias of the internal structure studies of PROMs with examples.
ObjectiveTo investigate the preoperative symptom burden and quality of life of patients undergoing lung cancer surgery.MethodsThis study was a cross-sectional study. We used the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-lung cancer module (MDASI-LC) and the single-item quality of life scale (UNISCALE) to collect the preoperative patient-reported outcomes of 265 patients with lung cancer from November 2017 to July 2019 in Sichuan Cancer Hospital.ResultsOf 265 patients, 90.9% had preoperative symptoms. The five most common symptoms were coughing (66.8%), dry mouth (53.6%), memory problems (52.8%), disturbed sleep (52.1%) and fatigue (44.2%). The five most common moderate to severe symptoms were disturbed sleep (23.0%), distress (18.5%), memory problems (16.6%), coughing (16.2%) and dry mouth (16.2%). Patients with early-stage lung cancer had less pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, lack of appetite, numbness and coughing, and their symptoms had less impact on work (including housework), relations with other people, walking and enjoyment of life as well as better quality of life before surgery (P<0.05). Patients with adenocarcinoma had milder coughing and a better quality of life before surgery (P<0.05). Symptom score was positively correlated with symptom interference with life score (r=0.66, P<0.01) and negatively correlated with quality of life score (r=-0.41, P<0.01).ConclusionMost patients undergoing lung cancer surgery have a mild symptom burden before surgery. The most common and severe symptoms are coughing, dry mouth, lung cancer and disturbed sleep. Patients with early-stage lung cancer have a milder symptom burden and a better quality of life.
ObjectiveTo explore the necessity of routine X-ray examination after lung surgery based on patient symptom burden. MethodsA retrospective study was conducted on the patients who underwent thoracoscopic lung resection at the Department of Thoracic Surgery of Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital from March 2020 to April 2023. The routine chest X-ray examination results and symptom burden of postoperative patients were analyzed. Symptom burden was evaluated using the Perioperative Symptom Assessment Lung inventory. Results A total of 2 101 patients were collected, including 915 males and 1 100 femals, with a median age of 56 years. Among patients who underwent routine postoperative chest X-ray, only 1.0% patients accepted intervention. Among patients who had chest X-ray after chest tube removal, only 0.5% of them needed intervention. Among patients who had chest X-ray one month after discharge, only 1.3% of them required intervention. The intervention group had significantly worse shortness of breath (3 points vs. 2 points, P=0.015), pain (2 points vs. 1 point, P=0.039), and disturbed sleep (3 points vs. 2 points, P=0.036) compared with the normal group. Conclusion Very few routine postoperative chest X-ray examinations change patients’ management, and patients who need extra-intervention tended to have more severe symptom burden after surgery.