Kimberly M Davis, David Dawson, Scott Kelly, Sara Red, Sofiya Penek, John Lynch, Sean Collins, Barlow Lynch, Michael Porrazzo, Michael Bass, Kathryn L Taylor
{"title":"Monitoring of health-related quality of life and symptoms in prostate cancer survivors: a randomized trial.","authors":"Kimberly M Davis, David Dawson, Scott Kelly, Sara Red, Sofiya Penek, John Lynch, Sean Collins, Barlow Lynch, Michael Porrazzo, Michael Bass, Kathryn L Taylor","doi":"10.12788/j.suponc.0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Routine symptom and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessments can engage patients, give provider feedback, and improve doctor/patient communication.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We compared the impact of a technology-assisted symptom monitoring system versus usual care on HRQOL and doctor/patient communication in early-stage prostate cancer (PCa) survivors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Men (N = 94) were on average 62-years old, mostly African American (AA; 61.7%), and 10-19 months post-treatment. They were randomized to symptom monitoring plus feedback (SM + F; n = 49) or usual care (UC; n = 45). SM+F participants completed a 12-item telephoneassisted monitoring intervention. All participants completed a baseline and 2 follow-up interviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the SM+F participants, perceptions of the monitoring system were positive: 97.1% endorsed it as easy/very easy to use and 85% felt all patients could benefit from it. At baseline, men reported favorable general and cancer-specific HRQOL and doctor/patient communication, but poorer urinary and sexual function. Although there was no overall impact of the intervention, post hoc exploratory analyses indicated that among AA men, those who received SM+F improved relative to UC on doctor/patient communication (P < .05), general HRQOL (P < .06), and sexual function (P < .05).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Variability in survivor follow-up care, limited access to eligible participants, and minimal physician training in the use of reports likely decreased physician investment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, PCa survivors were receptive to this monitoring system. Exploratory analyses suggest that this technology-assisted monitoring system may be of particular benefit to African American men. Additional studies with larger samples, more intervention time-points, and increased physician training are needed to strengthen the intervention's impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":75116,"journal":{"name":"The journal of supportive oncology","volume":"11 4","pages":"174-82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of supportive oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12788/j.suponc.0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13
Abstract
Background: Routine symptom and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessments can engage patients, give provider feedback, and improve doctor/patient communication.
Objective: We compared the impact of a technology-assisted symptom monitoring system versus usual care on HRQOL and doctor/patient communication in early-stage prostate cancer (PCa) survivors.
Methods: Men (N = 94) were on average 62-years old, mostly African American (AA; 61.7%), and 10-19 months post-treatment. They were randomized to symptom monitoring plus feedback (SM + F; n = 49) or usual care (UC; n = 45). SM+F participants completed a 12-item telephoneassisted monitoring intervention. All participants completed a baseline and 2 follow-up interviews.
Results: Among the SM+F participants, perceptions of the monitoring system were positive: 97.1% endorsed it as easy/very easy to use and 85% felt all patients could benefit from it. At baseline, men reported favorable general and cancer-specific HRQOL and doctor/patient communication, but poorer urinary and sexual function. Although there was no overall impact of the intervention, post hoc exploratory analyses indicated that among AA men, those who received SM+F improved relative to UC on doctor/patient communication (P < .05), general HRQOL (P < .06), and sexual function (P < .05).
Limitations: Variability in survivor follow-up care, limited access to eligible participants, and minimal physician training in the use of reports likely decreased physician investment.
Conclusion: Overall, PCa survivors were receptive to this monitoring system. Exploratory analyses suggest that this technology-assisted monitoring system may be of particular benefit to African American men. Additional studies with larger samples, more intervention time-points, and increased physician training are needed to strengthen the intervention's impact.