Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2021
How do patient-reported outcomes compare with clinician assessments? A prospective study of radiation dermatitis in breast cancer.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Behroozian Tara, Milton Lauren, Zhang Liying, Lou Julia, Karam Irene, Lam Emily, Wong Gina, Szumacher Ewa, Chow Edward
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Breast cancer patients frequently develop radiation dermatitis (RD) when undergoing post-operative radiation therapy (RT). Traditional RD assessment methods measure clinician-reported outcomes (CROs), but patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have gained recent popularity. The purpose of this prospective analysis was to compare PROs with CROs of breast RD.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Demographic and treatment characteristics were prospectively collected for patients receiving post-operative RT between February 2018 to September 2020. Patients and clinicians completed a skin symptom assessment at baseline, weekly during RT, and at a one- to three-month follow-up visit. Skin treatments used by patients were collected. Concordance between each PRO and CRO was determined using percent concordance and concordance index (C-statistic) by logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 777 patients were included in the present study. All skin symptom assessment items were significantly underreported by clinicians in comparison to patients (p < 0.0001), with a low to moderate level of concordance (C-statistic range: 0.58-0.70; percent concordance range: 29-50%). The majority of patients used moisturizing creams as a prophylactic measure (65.1%), as per institutional guidelines.
CONCLUSION: There were significant discrepancies between PROs and CROs when assessing breast RD. CROs alone are insufficient in measuring RD as they fail to capture the impact on patient quality of life. The study findings highlight the need for improved RD symptom assessment and support the development of a new tool with both patient and clinician components.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Demographic and treatment characteristics were prospectively collected for patients receiving post-operative RT between February 2018 to September 2020. Patients and clinicians completed a skin symptom assessment at baseline, weekly during RT, and at a one- to three-month follow-up visit. Skin treatments used by patients were collected. Concordance between each PRO and CRO was determined using percent concordance and concordance index (C-statistic) by logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 777 patients were included in the present study. All skin symptom assessment items were significantly underreported by clinicians in comparison to patients (p < 0.0001), with a low to moderate level of concordance (C-statistic range: 0.58-0.70; percent concordance range: 29-50%). The majority of patients used moisturizing creams as a prophylactic measure (65.1%), as per institutional guidelines.
CONCLUSION: There were significant discrepancies between PROs and CROs when assessing breast RD. CROs alone are insufficient in measuring RD as they fail to capture the impact on patient quality of life. The study findings highlight the need for improved RD symptom assessment and support the development of a new tool with both patient and clinician components.